United Sidles Of lice of Planning April 1979
Eiwuonmenial Protection and Management
Agency Washington DC 20460
<>EPA EPA Agency Guidance
Fiscal Year 1980/81
OOHB79102
-------
EPA AGENCY GUIDANCE
FISCAL YEARS 1980/81
U,S, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D,C,
APRIL, 1979
-------
FOREWORD
This Agency Guidance culminates an intensive review
of EPA's plans and priorities for the 1980 and 1981 fiscal
years. It gives specific direction on issues in the 1980
operating plan and serves as a basic agenda for the 1981
budget.
CHANGES FROM LAST YEAR
Past users of the Gu.ide%nce viil note that its
contents differ from last year's in several respects.
Media Focus
Last year's Guidance contained lengthy, detailed
descriptions and directions for specific Decision Units.
This approach resulted in a lack of coordination among
Decision Units, and shifted attention away from common
Agency purposes and assumptions. This year's Guidance
takes a broader perspective, focusing on the principal
issues, assumptions, and priorities within each of the
media.
Extension to Headquarters
This document completes last year's extension of the
Guidance to Headquarters programs. Headquarters plans
for FY 1980 and FY 1981, with discussions of changes from
last year and possible alternatives for the future, appear
in each program's Guidance. For media with research
programs, Headquarters plans also include, for the first
time, a Research section describing EPA's present
priorities for Research and Development.
Cross-cutting Guidance
While one section of the Interdisciplinary Guidance
is devoted to interdisciplinary R&D (like last year), two
additional sections have been added. These sections deal
with Federal Activities and Environmental Profiles. They
apply to all Agency programs and should be considered
supplementary guidance for all media.
111
-------
Length
Preparation of last year's Guidance imposed an
excessive workload on the programs, and the document
was too long. This year's Guidance has been shortened
substantially.
Four Parts of the Package
Last year's Guidance marked the first appearance
of separate Policy Guidance and State Guidance documents.
This year, there is also a separate Research and Develop-
ment Guidance, compiled from the Research section of each
program's Headquarters Plan. These three publications
supplement the Agency Guidance (this document) and provide
information about EPA's plans and priorities to audiences
(e.g., States, R&D labs, the general public) that do not
wish or need to review the entire Guidance package.
PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS (PPA's)
The Guidance defines the scope of the Agency's
Regional programs. The Agency will use PPA's as a guide in
developing budget justifications. A listing of selected
PPA's for FY 1980 will be preprinted on the Operating Plan
forms that will be part of the Planning Manual. We will
provide these forms to the Regions at the same time as the
Regional resource targets.
The ZBB forms may require quantified end-of-year
output projections based on these PPA's. Regions should
submit them as part of the Regional Operating Plans;
projected output levels should be negotiated with appro-
priate Headquarters program offices before final approval
of the Operating Plans. The selected PPA's will be
consistent with the Guidance and correspond to those
activities contained in the workload analysis. Each
Regional and Headquarters office will be required to
submit an end-of-year accomplishment report, which will
feed back into next year's Agency Guidance, workload
analysis, and OMB budget submission.
Paul Elston's March 13, 1979 memorandum to the
Assistant Administrators and Regional Administrators on
Agency reporting requirements discusses the steps we will
take during the rest of this fiscal year to reinstitute
IV
-------
reporting in the Agency. The content of a future formal
reporting system has not yet been determined. Therefore,
there may be some overlap between the PPA's in the Agency
Guidance and the measures to be incorporated in a new
reporting system. PPA's may or may not be included in such
a system for FY 1980 and 1981; by themselves, they do not
constitute the reporting system. Considering this, any
reference to PPA reporting or frequency of reporting in
the Agency Guidance should be temporarily suspended until
decisions are made on a new reporting system for FY 1980
and FY 1981.
MONITORING
There has been considerable activity during FY 1979
to improve the Agency's monitoring activities, and improved
monitoring continues to be a priority for FY 1980 and 1981.
Specifically, one has identified a number of issues that will
affect how we conduct monitoring. The issues that are being
addressed include:
o how to develop methods, and how to develop capabili-
ties in the Regions and States, for analyzing toxic
pollutants;
o how to improve the quality of the collection
and analysis of samples and the quality of other
data the Agency collects;
o developing and using better statistical methodologies
for analyzing environmental data;
o defining the role of biological monitoring and
health data collection;
o how to obtain resources for needed laboratory
equipment;
o identifying ways of preventing overlap and
redundancy in monitoring programs; and
o improving planning and resource allocation for
monitoring throughout the Agency.
Individual programs do prescribe in this Guidance
actions to improve the monitoring activities in their
specific media and in some cases prescribe actions to be
taken in the same areas the Select Work Group is considering
-------
(e.g., improving quality assurance of data). Policies on
monitoring that the Agency adopts as a result of the Select
Work Group on Monitoring's Review will be fully circulated
so that program managers can incorporate them into their
programs at all levels.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT
This Guidance is the basis for the FY 1980 Operating
Plans which must be submitted for each Decision Unit.
These plans should follow the priorities laid out in the
Guidance and give reasons for any significant differences.
The Guidance also provides the basic policy information
necessary for constructing and reviewing descriptions of
the FY 1981 Decision Units. In early June, Media Task
Groups will review these Decision Unit descriptions for
consistency with the Guidance.
The Program Analysis Division will issue the EPA
Planning Manual soon. That document will give further
details on the character and timing of Media Task Group
.reviews and ranking responsibilities. Media Task Groups
may also want to meet before their ranking sessions to
review analyses of issues identified in the Administrator's
Analytic Agenda and earlier Task Group meetings.
Our principal objectives in this year's planning and
.^budgeting cycle are to simplify the budget process, while
^expanding our analysis of significant issues and encour-
aging the Agency to look at the assumptions behind itts
.actions as well as their consequences. The success of
this Guidance will be measured by the extent to which it
serves these goals.
VI
-------
EPA AGENCY GUIDANCE
FISCAL YEARS 1980/81
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
FOREWORD iii
ADMINISTRATOR'S/DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR'S
POLICY GUIDANCE 3
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATORS' OVERVIEWS
AIR, NOISE AND RADIATION 11
WATER AND WASTE MANAGEMENT 16
TOXIC SUBSTANCES 20
ENFORCEMENT 35
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 42
PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT 48
MEDIA GUIDANCES
AIR
MEDIA OVERVIEW 55
HEADQUARTERS PLANS
Abatement and Control 62
Enforcement 65
Research and Development 69
REGIONAL GUIDANCE
Abatement and Control 79
Enforcement 90
PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS 92
VII
-------
WATER QUALITY
MEDIA OVERVIEW 107
HEADQUARTERS PLANS
Abatement and Control 122
Enforcement 147
Research and Development 156
REGIONAL GUIDANCE
Abatement and Control 164
Enforcement ..... . 192
PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS 200
DRINKING WATER
MEDIA OVERVIEW 227
HEADQUARTERS PLANS
Abatement and Control 231
Enforcement 233
Research and Development 236
REGIONAL GUIDANCE
Abatement and Control 247
Enforcement 250
SOLID WASTE
MEDIA OVERVIEW 255
HEADQUARTERS PLANS
Abatement and Control 262
Enforcement 266
Research and Development 267
REGIONAL GUIDANCE
Abatement and Control 271
Enforcement 274
PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS 276
Vlll
-------
TOXIC SUBSTANCES
MEDIA OVERVIEW 281
HEADQUARTERS PLANS
Abatement and Control 289
Enforcement 293
Research and Development 297
REGIONAL GUIDANCE
Abatement and Control 307
Enforcement 322
PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS 324
PESTICIDES
MEDIA OVERVIEW 329
HEADQUARTERS PLANS
Abatement and Control 334
Enforcement 337
Research and Development 340
REGIONAL GUIDANCE
Abatement and Control 346
Enforcement 351
PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS 354
RADIATION
MEDIA OVERVIEW 361
HEADQUARTERS PLANS
Abatement and Control 364
Research and Development 365
REGIONAL GUIDANCE 368
PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS 372
IX
-------
NOISE
MEDIA OVERVIEW 377
HEADQUARTERS PLANS
Abatement and Control 379
Enforcement - . 385
REGIONAL GUIDANCE 388
PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS 391
ENERGY
MEDIA OVERVIEW 397
CONTROL TECHNOLOGY 398
HEALTH EFFECTS 406
INTERDISCIPLINARY
MEDIA OVERVIEW 413
FEDERAL ACTIVITIES 415
OTHER ACTIVITIES 427
MANAGEMENT
OVERVIEW 435
HEADQUARTERS AND REGIONAL GUIDANCE
Personnel . 438
Contracts Management 441
Resources Management 444
Planning, Evaluation, and Analysis . . 449
Agency Support Services 455
Legal Services 457
Administrator's Staff Offices 458
-------
ADMINISTRATOR'S POLICY GUIDANCE
1980/1981
DOUGLAS M, COSTLE, ADMINISTRATOR
BARBARA BLUM, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR
-------
ADMINISTRATOR'S POLICY GUIDANCE
EPA and State and local agencies can be proud of what
they have accomplished over the last two years. We have
won strong legislative mandates, and we are making good
progress in implementing them. EPA is better integrated,
and we have begun the process of strengthening our State
and local relationships. We are making good progress in
developing effective controls for toxics. In area after
area we are recognized front-runners in the Administration's
reform efforts. The air and the water are getting cleaner.
The people, the President, and the Congress support our
work: they respect both our professionalism and our
ability to get a tough job done.
This Guidance addresses the future. But before we
go on to define what lies ahead, we wanted to note how far
EPA has come. The Agency has been working hard and well.
Congratulations and our thanks.
In this Agency Policy Guidance we identify what we
feel the Agency's priorities should be for the next
several years. Our Assistant Administrators follow with
more detailed guidance for each of their areas of respon-
sibility. We have worked closely with them in developing
these program guidances.
Broadly stated, the Agency's priorities are as
follows:
o To reduce public exposure to dangerous
pollutants;
o To protect sensitive ecological systems;
and
o To improve management of our environmental
programs.
REDUCE PUBLIC EXPOSURE TO DANGEROUS POLLUTANTS
Over the last several years we have come to understand
more of the connections between the thousands of chemicals
our society has put into our environment and a great many
of the diseases that afflict modern man. EPA has been
given lead responsibility for identifying, evaluating,
and controlling environmental pollutants. Doing so is one
-------
_ 4 -
of our chief objectives. We are approaching the problem $
every point — when a chemical is produced, shipped, used,
or ultimately disposed of. Our Toxics, Air, Water,
Pesticides, Drinking Water, Radiation, Hazardous Waste,
and spills programs must all give the toxics problem
greater priority. In doing so we expect that all action
on individual pollutants should generally be governed by
the principle of addressing first those that present the
greatest health risks. A major part of that effort has
been the development of an integrated strategy for toxic
substances, a strategy which we will continue to develop
and refine throughout 1980 and 1981 through vigorous
implementation of the Toxic Substances Control Act.
As another element of an Agency-wide toxics strategy,
we will develop an Agency cancer policy. The policy
will provide a framework for continuing decision-making
in our pesticides, toxics, and drinking water programs
and for emerging carcinogen regulations under the Agency's
air, water, and hazardous waste programs.
Finally, our urban strategy is a key part of this
effort because it is based on attacking the unhealthy
environmental conditions of cities. We expect the
Assistant Administrators and you to continue to implement
our existing urban initiatives and to develop innovative
solutions for urban problems.
PROTECT SENSITIVE ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
Increasingly during the past two years, we have
focused the Agency's efforts on dealing with pollutants
as they affect public health. Ultimately, however, we
must protect the environment that supports us and all
other life. While continuing to clean up our air and
water, we need to give much more attention to particularly
sensitive environmental systems such as wetlands. Though
natural systems like wetlands and fisheries are usually
described as renewable — on the assumption that they can
regenerate themselves when depleted or damaged -- we are
beginning to learn how fragile they truly are as we begin
to understand sensitive ecological relationships. Once a
groundwater supply is contaminated with toxics, for
example, it may take centuries for natural restoration
(or millions of dollars for clean-up) if it is ever to
support healthy natural life or to be used for drinking
water.
-------
- 5 -
IMPROVE MANAGEMENT OF OUR ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS
We have made a major commitment to finding better,
more effective ways of regulating. There are almost fifty
reform efforts in progress across the Agency now. We are
beginning to see the results of this commitment, and we
expect a great many more initiatives to move into
implementation stages over the next several years. We
will continue to look for complements to traditional
regulation, such as offsets and the bubble, our reporting
requirements, sunset, and procedural simplifications. We
want your active help in finding better ways to carry out
our responsibilities. Specifically, we want to continue
to:
o Integrate EPA programs -- We have made a good
start in our efforts to consolidate our grant
and permit programs. The integration of programs
in water quality, drinking water, solid waste,
hazardous wastes, and underground injection can
serve as a good model for other program areas.
o Strengthen Federal/State/local partnerships --
Establishing the State/EPA Agreements and
encouraging appropriate delegation should streng-
then and improve environmental programs at all
levels. We also need to retain and improve our
ability to assess performance at all levels. We
want to work for passage of an Integrated Environ-
mental Assistance Act as a legislative base for
increasing management flexibility between us and
the States as well as in State programs.
o Improve coordination with other Federal agencies —
We must make greater use of the IRLG and Regulatory
Council mechanism to assure coordinated and
concerted action among all Federal agencies. We
must work particularly closely with the Department
of Energy in developing environmentally and health
sensitive energy policies.
o Reform and refine our management practices —
In this area we are emphasizing the completion of
Civil Service reforms recently enacted. We must
also put in place the planning, zero-based
budgeting accountability system for the Agency.
-------
In addition, we are reassessing our monitoring
with an eye to the quality, utility and compati-
bility of our information systems.
o Improve regulatory reform — We are giving major
emphasis to the development of more flexible, less
costly alternatives to our traditional regulatory
approaches, such as the "bubble" concept and
"banking" of offsets in nonattainment areas. We
want to continue improving the quality of our
regulations. One of the most important elements
to the latter is continued strengthening of the
Steering Committee; we want to enlarge the role
of the Regions in this process.
o Strengthen the Agency's research capacity and
programs -- We want to improve our ability to
forecast environmental problems and solutions,
particularly in the long term. We need to expand
the data base for our regulatory decision-making.
Finally, there are a number of cross-cutting issues
we want to flag. We expect:
o a strong commitment to improving public partici- "
pation;
o a determined affirmative action program; and
o continued attention to the Administration's
urban programs.
*****
The 1980-1981 planning years present a great challenge
to us as managers. We must continue to move this Agency
toward protecting public health and the environment more
fully. We expect that each participant in this planning
will consider how his or her program can contribute to
these initiatives.
-------
The following sections of this Guidance set forth our
priorities in greater detail. They serve as the basis for
FY 1980 Federal and State program implementation and as
the policy framework for program and resource recommen-
dations to the President for FY 1981.
Do
Admini
M. Costle
rator
Barbara Blum
Deputy Administrator
-------
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATORS' OVERVIEWS
AIR, NOISE, AND RADIATION
WATER AND WASTE MANAGEMENT
TOXIC SUBSTANCES
ENFORCEMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
-------
OFFICE OF AIR, NOISE, AND RADIATION
Overview Statement of Priorities and Goals
David G. Hawkins, Assistant Administrator
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND INFORMATION
Each OANR program plan should include resources and
should plan for effective participation, Limited resources
should also be available for case-by-case assistance to
participants in a small number of major rulemaking and/or
permit proceedings.
I would also like OANR offices to work with Regional
Offices to develop effective public participation programs
for their activities.
Finally, each office should review existing public
information materials in its area of responsibility.
Program plans should provide for major improvements in
our information base and should include a system for
keeping our public information materials current. Please
work with our Office of Public Awareness representative
in this effort. Our laws, particularly the Clean Air
Act, are complex but their purposes and effects can be
simply explained. We must make more of an effort to do
so.
AIR
High priority must be given in 1980 to completing all
actions required as a result of State implemention plan
submissions in 1979. Most plan approvals, disapprovals,
and promulgations should be completed in 1979, as should
the schedules for implementing the plans. However, some
such actions may not occur until 1980. We must have in
place systems for tracking State progress in implement-
ing their approved plans. We need to emphasize and
develop ways of assuring that the States assume their
responsibilities under the plans including all new source
review responsibilities. It is especially important that
we encourage States to implement the program for Prevention
of Significant Deterioration.
-------
- 12 -
During 1980 programs for visibility protection and
Prevention of Significant Deterioration for pollutants
other than TSP and SC>2 should be ready for implementation.
States should be urged to assume responsibility for these
programs as well.
The next major round of SIP revisions will be in 1982
for those areas where EPA has granted extensions beyond
the 1982 deadline. Our guidance requires that for ozone
these areas base their revised plans on an air quality
model. It appears that the most appropriate technique for
protecting future air quality in this round of SIPs will
be the relatively complex dispersion models which account
for photochemical reactions. We should give high priority
in 1980 to the acquisition of data required for these
models and to validating them. The 1981 program plan
should provide for the use of these models in all areas
where required in a time frame that permits technical
review and public participation on development of control
strategy A.o assure meeting the Clean Air requirements.
The general problem of lack of confidence in air
quality o ita also must be addressed in 1980. Emphasis
must be given to the establishment of technically sound
sites and procedures for National Air Monitoring Stations
fNAMS) and State Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) as
required by our monitoring regulations. Participation by
State/local laboratories in quality assurance programs
should be mandatory. If the programs require additional
resources, this should receive a high priority in the
1981 budget request.
At Headquarters, by December 31, 1890, we must have
completed our review and appropriate revision of all
existing ambient air quality standards. The plan for
1980 should clearly recognize this requirement and, given
the need for a better quantification of benefits, provide
for the development of such a data base and analyses as
may be required.
The budget for 1980 provides funding to complete the
development of new source performance standards for all
major stationary sources by 1982. The program plans for
1980 and 1981 must demonstrate that we are on a schedule
which will meet that statutory deadline.
-------
- 13 -
No large increment in resources is being provided in
1980 for activities related to hazardous air pollutants.
I expect that, before the next fiscal year begins, we will
have in place a policy on air carcinogens providing a
systematic approach to substantially reduce risks from air-
borne carcinogens. Our plan in 1980 should provide for
the orderly implementation of that policy with a major
intensification of actions in 1981. This program should
take into account and be coordinated with other programs
regulating risks from toxic or hazardous pollutants.
In Mobile Sources we should have completed all vehicle
rulemaking specifically required by the Clean Air Act in
1980. Our future standard-setting program should address
the need to regulate presently unregulated pollutants, and
resources to address the light-duty diesel should be
available in 1980 in the event that research establishes
the need for additional action. Cur 1980 program should
focus on such assessment activities as may be necessary if
standards are to be proposed in FY 1981 or subsequent
fiscal years.
Given commitments to inspection/maintenance programs
in the SIP's, we must be in a position of being able to
provide expert guidance to State and local I/M programs.
The 1980 plans should address, as a matter of priority,
such data gathering and assessment as may be necessary to
assure that we can assist I/M programs to achieve their
maximum potential.
We should give major attention to other activities
which will help assure that vehicles in use perform as
intended, and the 1980/81 plans should specifically address
this concern. In particular, we should continue to examine
test procedures to improve their relation to real-world
problems.
NOISE
In FY 1980 I think that every effort should he made
to become current with our previous commitments to regulate
new products. New commitments should be limited until we
are assured that the backlog of previous identifications
and/or proposals can be eliminated. If we take on new
efforts, they should focus on transportation-related
concerns.
-------
- 14 -
To the extent the 1980 budget is not adequate to complete
the required pre-regulatory work for light duty vehicles
and tires, the Agency should not make formal commitments.
These sources would then be a major initiative in the
1981 budget.
Although I am attracted by the idea of using noise
labeling as a method of enhancing consumer choice, I
believe we should complete promulgation of the general
labelling and hearing protector regulations first. Any
proposal for additional work in the labeling area in
1980 must be carefully tailored to fit within available
resources and my desire for us to complete pending
actions. An expanded program may be considered in 1981,
but it should have a lesser priority than work related to
transportation sources.
I am anxious that we show material progress in
implementing the Quiet Communities Act. To the extent
that our stated goals of 400 communities and 40 States
with effective noise programs provide a real basis for
program planning, our program plans for both 1980 and
1981 should clearly indicate projected progress against
these goals.
We should likewise display our actions to undertake
investigations and studies on a more complete health
base for noise control against a specified'objective. I
think it important that we develop an outline which
indicated the areas in which new information should be
produced on a priority basis and that our proposed
research-related plans in both 1980 and 1981 indicate how
they will meet our needs as outlined.
RADIATION
In radiation the mission of EPA is now reasonably
well defined as a result of the IRG Report, Libassi
Committee deliberations, NRC Agreements, and our own
actions in developing criteria for waste disposal. The
IRG Report indicating the multi-agency nature of the
Federal government's nuclear waste management program
should be used as a blueprint for defining the scope of
and timing required for EPA standard-setting in this
area. The program focus in 1980 should be on actions
delineated in that report.
-------
- 15 -
The priority we give to actions under the Clean Air
Act must be a product of the reduction in radiation risk
which such actions can accomplish compared to reduction
achieved in other radiation programs. To the extent that
priority must be given to the issue of radioactive waste,
and/or to the completion of standards required under the
Uranium Mill Tailings Act, I am willing to accept a slower
rate of progress on Clean Air Act-related problems in 1980,
Nevertheless, the program plan for 1981 should present a
full range of actions to effectively implement our deter-
minations on the nature of radioactive air pollution
problems, we should assign them high priority.
Given the acknowledged limitations of our resources,
I would expect only limited EPA resources devoted in 1980
to implement EPA's general authorities to provide Federal
radiation guidance. I would much prefer that we take time
to establish an interagency committee to review the poten-
tial scope of the guidance function and assess priorities
as our major program action in the guidance area in 1980.
Implementation of the committee's recommendations would
follow in 1980 and 1981. Additional resources for EPA in
1981 could be sought where necessary to supplement the
resources of other agencies.
-------
OFFICE OF WATER AND WASTE MANAGEMENT
Overview Statement of Priorities and Goals
Thomas C. Jorling, Assistant Administrator
The priority objectives of EPA's Water and Wastewater
Management programs are to implement statutory mandates
providing for:
o Achievement and maintenance of the physical,
chemical, and biological integrity of the Nation's
ground and surface waters, with special emphasis
on protection of public health and sensitive
aquatic ecosystems;
o Treatment, containment, and control of toxic and
hazardous materials in solid waste;
o Protection of an adequate supply of high quality
drinking water for public consumption; and
o Federal, State, and local development of integrated
environmental management systems which minimize
transfers of pollutants between media and which
identify optimal ultimate disposal strategies for
pollutants.
The objectives described above can be achieved most
efficiently in terms of both dollars and manpower through:
o Effective use of State planning and program funds
to implement water quality management, water supply,
and solid waste management goals through State/EPA
Agreements;
o Management of the $4 billion/year construction grants
program to meet the treatment needs of publicly owned
treatment works (POTW's) effectively at least cost to
all levels of government;
o Application of alternative, innovative, and cost-
effective technologies and management practices
to solve water and solid waste pollution problems;
and
o Emphasis on resource recovery, reuse, and recycling
to conserve energy, materials, and water.
-------
- 17 -
The objectives and management tools to achieve them will
be delivered within a context of program integration and
consolidation. An integrated focus for the Agency and for
OWWM in particular arises because the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) closed the gaps in the waste disposal
cycle left by previous air and water legislation by providing
control for the disposal of pollutants in or on the land.
Since there is no "free dumping ground", an integrated
approach is necessary to determine the best mix of environ-
mental controls to minimize the adverse effects of pollution.
These integrative efforts will be manifest in the way we
deal with identifiable areas of control or regulation. For
example; many programs within OWWM act on specific chemicals.
When one program is dealing with a chemical, it is imperative
that all programs regulating that chemical share knowledge,
experience, and implementation.
Integration of water quality, water supply, and solid
waste programs will generally occur at the State level via
the State/EPA Agreement process. EPA will encourage States
to conduct integrated problem assessments, develop long-term
strategies to solve their water and waste management problems,
and commit to one-year work programs to implement their
strategies. In return, EPA will supply program and planning
grants from the Clean Water Act (CWA), Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA), and RCRA to assist the States that undertake
integrated approaches.
An integrated State/EPA agreement process is a logical
outgrowth of the Water Quality Management (WQM) program,
which is a key focus of the Office of Water and Waste
Management. The major goal of WQM is the development of a
State and local decision-making process to control point and
nonpoint sources of pollution. Current WQM efforts are
concentrated on plan implementation to achieve water quality
improvements. Continuing WQM grants will only be made to
State and areawide agencies who can show evidence of imple-
mentation.
In managing the $4 billion/year construction grant
program, the Agency will consider publicly-owned treatment
work systems as a structural and functional component of
human community. This should enable questions relating to
levels of performance and technology, operations and
maintenance, sludge management, pretreatment, toxics,
combined storm water overflow and urban drainage to be
viewed as parts of a single system.
-------
- 18 -
EPA's strategy for 1980-81, then, is to orient funding
toward meeting environmental requirements through stringent
cost-effectiveness review and to stress innovative and
alternative approaches to waste treatment, including water
and energy conservation, reuse and recycling of pollutants,
and small systems. Funds earmarked for State delegation
under Section 205(g) of the CWA will be directed toward
State assumption of program activities with high pro-
fessional quality consistent with Congressional policy and
requirements. In addition, the construction grant program
will move rapidly toward reinforcing other Agency actions
such as the control of toxics and enforcement objectives
through implementation of the municipal enforcement strategy.
Industry is a key focal point for the application of
technology and management practices to control environmental
pollution. The multiple controls on industry must be
applied in a coherent way to a single facility or industry
category to control toxic and hazardous pollutants effectively.
The available control mechanisms include spill prevention
control plans; best management practices for toxics; BAT,
pretreatment, new source performance standards, and BCT;
RCRA hazardous waste controls; and underground injection
control (UIC).
This arsenal of controls will be implemented coherently
through consolidated permitting of NPDES, RCRA Section 3005,
and UIC permits. Permit consolidation will enable concen-
tration on programmatic, environmental, and procedural
permitting elements which allow technical and legal talents
to be applied effectively and efficiently to achieve environ-
mental objectives.
All OWWM programs will emphasize conservation of our
precious natural resources: energy, water, minerals and
other materials. The resource recovery program will strive
to maximize the use of energy and materials which are
currently disposed of as solid wastes. Municipal and
industrial point source control programs will stress
reuse of wastewater and recycling of pollutants through
standards, permits, and financial assistance. In parti-
cular, the construction grants program will focus attention
on multi-purpose projects which recover energy and materials
and reuse wastewater.
Four final OWWM priority areas are: attention to
specific ecosystems; development of criteria and standards;
implementation of new OWWM public participation regulations;
and emergency response.
-------
- 19 -
o An important focus is on specific ecosystems or
subsets of ecosystems, such as: ground water as it
is influenced by the programs of OWWM; wetlands
protection as it is specifically achieved by the
regulatory program under section 404, and wetlands
as influenced by such other factors as solid waste
facility siting, treatment systems siting, and
others. The oceans represent another ecosystem
which is high priority and can only be protected
by the integrated application of OWWM programs.
o Another integration of OWWM activity ranging across
all programs is in development of criteria and
standards. Water quality criteria, 404 criteria,
403 criteria, safe drinking water standards, and
hazardous substance criteria all will be looked at
as they are developed, issued and applied.
o Overall public participation regulations for water
quality, water supply and solid waste programs,
which were promulgated in February 1979, will be
implemented in 1980. These regulations support
program integration objectives by standardizing
certain public participation requirements for OWWM
programs. They should foster more effective and
constructive public involvement across these
programs.
o 1980 must see the emergency response capabilities
of OWWM integrated so that the various authorities
under the Safe Drinking Water Act, Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, and the Clean Water
Act are carried out in a coherent way by adequately
trained people. We must build on the emergency
response capabilities already in place under
section 311 and expand them to recognize that the
response is attentive not just to surface waters
but also to ground waters and to the landscape
and atmosphere.
-------
OFFICE OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES
Overview Statement of Priorities and Goals
Steven D. Jellinek, Assistant Administrator
This Overview Statement lays out what I believe
to be the important priorities for achievement by the
pesticides and toxics programs for the years 1980
and 1981. As such, it represents my "guidance" to
the managers and staff of the two programs and infor-
mation of interest to our colleagues throughout the
Agency.
I have arranged the objectives for each into
"general" and "specific" categories. The specific
objectives are subdivided further into "highest"
priority, "high" priority, and "other." We have no
low priority objectives.
The general objectives are provided to give a
sense of what I believe are the thrust and tone of
the programs. The specific objectives are more in
the nature of outputs I expect to be delivered.
TOXICS—1979
General Objectives
o Continue the thrust toward institution-
building. From the organizational per-
spective :
- Secure adequate space.
Staff up to budgeted levels with
; qualified professional and support
personnel, with special efforts on
increasing the number of women
and minorities.
- Organize to the branch level.
-------
- 21 -
From the regulatory perspective:
Place more emphasis on premanufacture
review, test standards, and test rules.
- Give less emphasis to existing chemical
regulation.
o Complete the development of a priority
setting system for choosing chemicals for
testing and regulation under TSCA and
other statutes; clarify and establish the
role of the Toxic Substances Priorities
Committee in this system.
o Develop a detailed program planning system
for each DAA-ship.
o Clarify the regional role in TSCA implementation,
Specific Objectives
Highest Priority
o Publish the Chemical Substances Inventory.
o Promulgate the final regulations on premanu-
facture notification; establish and operate
a system for screening and assessing notices;
and take actions under TSCA sections 5(e)
and 5(f) to prevent or control the manufacture
of new chemicals, as required.
o Promulgate a final regulation establishing
test standards for oncogenicity, chronic
toxicity, combined oncogenicity and chronic
toxicity, and good laboratory practices.
o Propose the first section 4 test rule
requiring industry to test 20-30 chemical
substances and categories of substances.
o Propose a rule under section 8(a) to develop
basic use/exposure information on approximately
2-3,000 chemicals to aid in setting priorities
for regulation.
-------
- 22 -
Propose a regulation under section 6 banning
or limiting the use of one existing chemical
that poses an unreasonable risk to public
health.
Fully implement the program to help States
and school districts identify and control
asbestos in school buildings.
High Priority
Propose testing guidelines for premanufacture
notification.
Propose remaining test standards for health
effects and several fate and ecological
effects test standards; resolve inconsis-
tencies with pesticides testing guidelines.
Conduct health and environmental effects
assessments, monitoring, and economic impact
analyses to support regulation of new and
existing chemicals.
Follow premanufacture notices with individual
"significant new use rules" and/or individual
section 8 (a) information rules for a few
selected new chemicals, as required.
Begin the development of generic follow-up
systems for "significant new use rules" and
section 8(a) information rules for new
chemicals.
Begin developing proposed regulations banning
or limiting the use of an additional 2-4
existing chemicals that pose an unreasonable
risk to health or the environment.
Complete an analysis of the issues concerning
the impact of testing costs on small volume
chemicals and, if appropriate, develop
proposed legislative solutions.
-------
Other
- 23 -
Continue the development of TSCA and inter-
agency chemical information systems and data
bases.
Complete the development of responsive and
effective document control data services,
and FOI procedures.
Develop model rules for information gathering
under section 8(a).
o Develop a process to review and act expedi-
tiously on carcinogens, mutagens, and terato-
gens under section 4(f).
o Initiate the development of generic approaches
to banning or controlling the use of chemicals
under section 6.
o Promulgate the PCB ban rule.
o Provide industry assistance on TSCA require-
ments .
o Distribute State grants.
o Continue development of public participation
programs.
o Support OECD and other planned international
harmonization programs.
o Propose model regulations under section 8(c)
and 8(d) to require recordkeeping and submission
of health and safety studies concerning signifi-
cant effects of chemicals.
TOXICS—1980
General Objectives
o Continue the thrust toward institution-
building. From the organizational perspective:
-------
- 24 -
Staff up to budgeted levels with
qualified professional and support
personnel, with special efforts on
increasing the number of women and
minorities.
Build effective staff teams through
management actions and training.
From the regulatory perspective:
Fully operate premanufacture review
and test rule development.
Increase emphasis on existing chemical
regulation, both individual and generic
approaches.
o Operate a priority-setting system for choosing
chemicals for testing and regulation under TSCA
and other statutes, in conjunction with the
Toxic Substances Priorities Committee.
o Operate a detailed planning system for the
toxic substances program; initiate formal
evaluation; modify program design, as needed,
to increase quality and quantity of output;
develop, jointly with the R&D community,
specific program requirements for high
priority research; examine the need for
major legislative changes in 1981.
Specific Objectives
Highest Priority
o Fully operate the premanufacture notification
review process; take actions under sections
5(e) and 5(f) to prevent or control the
manufacture of new chemicals, as required.
o Promulgate the section 4 test rule proposed
in 1979; propose and promulgate additional
test rules.
o Conduct health and environmental effects
assessments, monitoring, and economic
impact analyses to support regulation of
new and existing chemicals.
-------
- 25 -
o Promulgate the section 6 regulations proposed
in 1979 banning or limiting the use of one
chemical; propose section 6 regulations for
several additional existing chemicals.
o Promulgate the section 8(a) information rule
on 2-3,000 chemicals proposed in 1979.
High Priority
o Promulgate final testing guidelines for premanu-
facture notification.
o Propose and promulgate model rules under
section 8(a); promulgate model rules for
sections 8(c) and 8(d).
o Promulgate the full set of health effects test
standards and the fate and ecological effects
test standards proposed in 1979; propose
additional fate and ecological effects test
standards.
o Futher develop and begin to use generic
follow-up systems for "significant new use
rules" and section 8(a) information rules for
new chemicals.
o Publish the revised chemical substances
inventory; maintain the integrity of the
inventory.
o Develop proposed regulations implementing
generic approaches to regulation under
section 6.
o Begin partial operation of TSCA and inter-
agency chemical information systems and data
bases; continue systems development.
o Review and act expeditiously on carcinogens,
mutagens, and teratogens under section 4(f).
Other
Begin reviewing existing test standards as
required by section 4.
-------
o Begin review of overall economic and
innovation effects of TSCA.
o Provide industry assistance on TSCA require-
ments.
o Continue to develop public participation
programs.
o Support OECD and other planned international
harmonization programs.
TOXICS —1981
General Objectives
o Achieve institutional maturity. From the
organizational perspective:
Have a stable organization in place with
technically and managerially qualified
staff.
From the regulatory perspective:
Fully operate all major program com-
ponents .
Balance emphasis on regulation of new
and existing chemicals.
o Operate an integrated priority-setting system
for choosing chemicals for testing and regu-
lation for TSCA and other statutes, in con-
junction with the Toxic Substances Priorities
Committee.
o Operate a detailed planning and evaluation
system for the toxic substances program;
explore alternatives to established regu-
latory approaches.
o If appropriate, develop and support pro-
posals for major legislative changes.
-------
- 27 -
Specific Objectives
Highest Priority
Fully operate the premanufacture notification
review process at an improved level; take
actions under sections 5(e) and 5(f) to pre-
vent or control the manufacture of new chemicals,
as required.
Promulgate and propose regulations under section
6 with greater emphasis on generic approaches,
banning or limiting the use of a significantly
greater number of existing chemicals that pose
unreasonable risks to public health.
Conduct health and environmental effects
assessments, monitoring, and economic impact
analyses to support regulations of new and
existing chemicals.
Continue promulgating rules under sections 4
and 8 to obtain data to support assessment
and regulation.
High Priority
o Revise testing guidelines for premanufacture
notification to provide more specific guidance,
o Complete fate and ecological effects test
standards; review existing test standards
as required by section 4.
o Use routine, generic follow-up systems for
"significant new use rules" and section 8(a)
information rules for new chemicals.
o Complete chemical information systems
development; operate systems, services, and
data bases at full scale.
Other
o Continue actions under 4(f).
o Maintain industry assistance.
-------
o Continue to develop public participation
programs .
o Support international harmonization programs.
o Continue TSCA overall economic and innovation
impact studies.
o Evaluate and refine operating programs.
PESTICIDES — 1979
General Objectives
o Continue the thrust toward institution-building.
From the organizational perspective:
- Secure adequate space.
Staff up to budgeted levels with qualified
professional and support personnel, with
special efforts on increasing the number
of women and minorities.
Complete the reorganization; fill senior
line positions.
From the regulatory perspective:
Place more emphasis on completing major
RPAR actions, initiating conditional
registration, establishing the registra-
tion standards process, and making
registration decisions on new chemicals
with adequate hazard data.
Give less emphasis to large-scale
operation of the registration standards
process .
o Develop management systems for expediting
decisionmaking on high volume operations,
such as registration and registration
standards .
o Develop a detailed program planning system.
o Clarify the regional role in FIFRA implementation
-------
29 -
Specific Objectives
Highest Priority
Review benefits and risks of 15-20 RPAR com-
pounds identified as posing potentially
unreasonable adverse effects,
Reach 17-23 final risk/benefit determinations
on RPAR compounds.
Implement the conditional registration program.
Process 25-30 new registrations, 5,000-5,600
administrative/technical amendments and 2,000-
2,500 routine/intrastate registrations in an
efficient, effective manner.
Give registration priority to new chemicals
for which complete hazard data are submitted.
Inititate the preparation of 42-47 generic
standards, including the reassessment of
associated tolerances.
Evaluate the scientific basis of the system
for establishing tolerances, including con-
sideration of inert ingredients in order to
revise tolerance regulations.
High Priority
Provide timely and responsive guidance to the
States relative to their FIFRA section 5(f)
experimental use permits and review 180-240
section 5 registrations in a median turn-
around time of 120 days.
Review 1,000-1,500 section 24(c) special local
needs registrations and conduct overview
activities on their final actions.
Review 170-220 section 18 emergency exemptions
in a median turnaround time of 4 weeks, including
full scientific review of pertinent data.
-------
- 30 -
o Develop proposed guidelines for biological
pesticides.
o Establish 80-120 pesticide residue tolerances
and review 75-100 amendments for food and
animal feed crops after review of data and
risk/benefit analyses in a median turnaround
time of 105 days.
o Accelerate the program to classify pesticides
for restricted use. Aim for completion in
1980.
o Develop and initiate procedures to require
early testing to fill data gaps on existing
compounds instead of waiting until such gaps
are identified in the development of generic
standards,
o Integrate 1PM into the RPAR process and into
regulatory actions (e.g., section 18 emergency
exemptions) when technically appropriate.
Other
Audit 50-70 testing laboratories.
Develop more precise procedures for handling
confidential business data.
Conduct training program.
Improve FOI response procedures, so that all
requests are given an initial response
within 10 days and a final response as
quickly as possible.
Monitor for hazard prediction and significance
of potential problems.
PESTICIDES—1980
General Objectives
Continue the thrust toward institution-
building. From the organizational perspective:
Build effective staff teams through
management actions and training.
-------
- 31 -
From the regulatory perspective:
Emphasize completion of the remaining
RPAR reviews, increasing production of
registration standards, and registration
decisions on new pesticide chemicals.
Initiate reregistration of existing
pesticides.
o Operate priority-setting systems for selection
of chemicals for the registration standard
process and for priority registration decisions
o Operate a detailed planning system; initiate
formal evaluation; modify program design, as
needed, to increase quantity and quality of
output; develop, jointly with the R&D
community, specific program requirements for
high priority research.
Specific Objectives
Highest Priority
o Review benefits and risks of 12-17 RPAR com-
pounds identified as posing potentially un-
reasonable adverse effects.
o Reach 15-20 final risk/benefit determinations
on RPAR compounds.
o Implement the conditional registration
program.
o Give registration priority to new chemicals
for which complete hazard data are submitted.
o Reregister 1,000-1,400 products from available
generic standards.
o Complete the generic standards initiated last
year, and initiate the preparation of 40-50
generic standards, including the reassessment
of associated tolerances.
-------
- 32 -
High Priority
Provide timely and responsive gu '.dan^e to the
States relative to their section 5MT) experi-
mental use permits, aiiu review 1?.) 40
section 5 registrations in a median turn-
around time of 120 days.
Review 1,000-1,500 section 24(c) special local
needs registrations and conduct overview
activities on their final actions.
Review 170-220 section 18 emergency exemptions
in & median turnaround time of 4 weeks, in-
cluding full scientific review of pertinent
dacr
Prom- Igate guidelines f _>r biological pesticides,
Establish 80-120 pesticide residue tolerances,
a G rt.-r:ew 75-10C amendmeni-s for food and
animal feed crops after review of data and
isk/bencfit analyses, in a median turnaround
time of 105 days.
Othe.:
o Audit 50-70 laboratories.
o Improve FOI response procedures, so that all
requests are given an initial response within
10 days and a final response as quickly as
possible.
o Monitor for hazard prediction and significance
of potential problems.
PESTICIDES--1981
General Objectives
o Achieve institutional maturity. From the
organizational perspective:
-------
- 33 -
Have a stable organization in place,
with technically and managerially
qualified staff.
From the regulatory perspective:
Fully operate all major program com-
ponents .
Substantially complete RPAR.
o Operate an integrated priority setting system.
o Operate a detailed planning and evaluation
system.
o Intensify strategy for replacement of older
pesticides with unknown or hazardous effects
with new, safer pesticides and alternative
pest control actions.
Specific Objectives
Highest Priority
o Integrate the RPAR process into the generic
standards production process,
o Give registration priority to innovative,
\ environmentally protective compounds.
o Reregister 1,000-1,400 products from available
generic standards.
o Complete the generic standards intiated last
year, and initiate the preparation of 40-50
generic standards, including the reassessment
of associated tolerances, with attention to
detail and quality.
High Priority
o Provide timely and responsive guidance to
the States relative to their section 5(f)
experimental use permits, and review 180-240
section 5 registrations in a median turn-
around time of 120 days.
-------
- 34 -
o Review 1,000-1,500 section 24(c) special
local needs registrations, and conduct
overview activities on their final actions.
o Review 170-220 section 18 emergency
exemptions in a median turnaround time of
4 weeks.
o Establish 80-120 pesticide residue tolerances,
and review 75-100 amendments for food and
animal feed crops after review of data
and risk/benefit analyses, in a median turn-
around time of 105 days.
Other
Audit 50-70 laboratories.
Improve FOI response procedures, so that all
requests are given an initial response within
10 Jays and a final response as quickly as
possible.
Monitor for hazard prediction and significance
of potential problems.
-------
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
Overview Statement of Priorities and Goals
Marvin B. Durning, Assistant Administrator
This guidance builds upon the top priority activities
set out for enforcement in the EPA Policy Guidance for
FY 1979/80. The activities described are our top enforce-
ment priorities, not a complete list of all enforcement
activities. These priorities are stated as programmatic
priorities and as management-institutional priorities, but
the two are obviously interrelated.
PROGRAMMATIC PRIORITIES
Enforcement in Emergencies
All EPA, State, and local enforcement personnel should
give top priority to any true emergencies involving sub-
stantial threats to public health and safety. Containment
and removal of the dangers is, of course, the top priority.
Follow-up on penalties for violations can be undertaken in
the course of other enforcement, rather than as an emergency,
This guidance applies, of course, to emergency enforcement
response to hazardous spills.
At this time in FY 1979, EPA personnel have as their
top priority the investigation and prevention of substantial
and imminent hazards created by existing or abandoned
chemical waste sites. Those efforts will continue as facts
may dictate. We expect a large number of civil actions of
this nature in FY 1980 and 1981.
Major Source Enforcement Effort
The major source enforcement effort against violators
of the Air Act and Water Act is our next highest priority
after emergency situations. Enforcement against these major
sources is critically important to accomplishing our environ-
mental goals. It is directed against that small minority of
major sources which failed to meet the requirements of the
Air and Water Acts by the statutory deadlines. It includes
many of the most serious and most recalcitrant sources of
pollution in the country. By bringing these sources into
compliance, with penalties where appropriate, we will keep
-------
- 36 -
faith with the great majority of firms and public bodies
which met their responsibilities and will build the
confidence necessary to continue voluntary compliance
with all the environmental laws.
In FY 1980, Regions and States will bring the major
source enforcement actions to decision by settlement,
administrative process, or court trial, including
appropriate penalties, and make or defend appeals. By
the end of FY 1980, the major source drive should be
nearly completed, with only a few actions and appeals
still pending in trial or appellate courts. In FY 1981,
actions and appeals still pending should be completed as
rapidly as possible.
Enforcement against Automobile and Truck Pollution
Because of the great public health and environmental
significance of air pollution from automobiles and trucks,
especially in urban areas, enforcement against mobile
sources of pollution will continue to be a top enforcement
priority in FY 80/81.
EPA enforcement will continue to ensure that new
vehicles meet emission standards. We will increase our Jj
emphasis on maintaining the effectiveness of emission ™
control systems throughout the period of their use. To
achieve this, EPA's main emphasis will be on inspection
and maintenance systems in the major nonattainment areas
for auto-related pollutants, supplemented with Head-
quarters audits and I/M programs.
o To ensure that new vehicles meet standards, EPA
enforcement will continue our assembly line
audits, recall and warranty efforts.
o To ensure that cars in use meet standards and to
support introduction of inspection and maintenance
systems where needed, EPA will continue to focus
investigations and enforcement actions (a) on
national or regional fleets, chains, dealership or
repair facilities, or "pattern" violations and (b)
in major metropolitan areas where auto pollution
is high and I&M will be introduced. EPA will
encourage State and local anti-fuel switching and
anti-tampering efforts.
-------
- 37 -
We will use private, State, or local contracts to
carry out inspections to ensure the availability and purity
of unleaded gasoline, and the installation and operation of
vapor recovery systems on fuel delivery trucks and at
gasoline outlets.
EPA and the States, in cooperation with other agencies,
will implement any programs authorized to control the
leaded-unleaded gas price differential and other authorized
environmental/energy programs.
Consolidated and Simplified Permitting
EPA is consolidating its permit programs, both to
simplify administrative steps and to get all important
environmental problems addressed in a single process. By
October 1, 1979, companies will be able to submit just
one application for all water, solid and hazardous waste
permits, go through one review, and be issued one permit.
We expect application forms for air quality permits to be
consolidated in late FY 1980 (or early FY 1981). NPDES
second round permits under the Clean Water Act will be
issued throughout FY 1980/81. We will begin to issue
hazardous waste permits in late FY 1980, accelerating in
FY 1981. We will also start issuing Underground Injection
permits in FY 1981.
In all permitting activities, we will give first
priority to large or major sources with serious adverse
health effects, including those with significant toxic
discharges.
Full Federal Compliance
President Carter has directed all Federal facilities
to come quickly into compliance with Federal, State, and
local environmental requirements.
By the end of 1980, we expect all, or almost all,
Federal facilities both major and minor sources will be
in compliance. Regions should see to it that all Federal
facilities do indeed come into compliance as soon as
possible. EPA will ensure that Federal agencies request
necessary funds for compliance by reviewing the agencies
plans included in the annual A-106 report.
-------
- 38 -
EPA is encouraging the States to assume these respon-
sibilities for Federal facilities. The States should
find the managers of Federal facilities cooperative. EPA
will assist the States in getting any disputes resolved.
Stationary Sources
Completing the Major Source Enforcement Effort contin-
ues to be of highest priority in FY 1980/81, including the
monitoring of compliance orders to ensure that sources comply
with the terms of the orders. We also want to ensure that
major sources comply with new requirements placed on them
by SIP revisions and by the ambient standards for lead, and
to enforce new source performance standards and national
emission standards for hazardous air pollutants.
As the Major Source Enforcement Effort is completed in
FY 1979/80, EPA will design and implement an improved program
of compliance monitoring and enforcement to ensure continuous
compliance.
During FY 1979, regulations will be promulgated for
administrative assessment of noncompliance penalties under
Section 120 of the Clean Air Act. This program should be
fully implemented during the second half of FY 1979 and
throughout FY 1980/81. Prompt implementation of these
penalties should assist in obtaining and maintaining
compliance with the Air Act.
Water Enforcement
Completion of the Major Source Enforcement Effort,
including actions against publicly owned treatment works
(POTW's), continues to be of highest priority in FY 1980/81.
As this effort is completed, EPA will design and implement
an improved program of compliance monitoring and enforcement
to ensure continuous compliance.
Beginning in FY 1979 and growing in importance in
FY 1980/81 will be advice and assistance to delegated States
so that State pretreatment programs can be established and
the conditions of those programs enforced. During FY 1981
the activities of assisting and advising States and POTW's,
modifying permits to incorporate pretreatment requirements,
approving POTW treatment programs, notifying affected
indirect dischargers, and determining treatment levels
should be at their peak level and of prime importance if we
are to achieve compliance by all affected POTW's and indirect
dischargers by FY 1983 or FY 1984. NPDES permits will be
issued as part of the consolidated permits program.
-------
- 39 -
Strategies for New Programs (TSCA, RCRA, SDWA, FIFRA)
In recent years. Congress has provided new programs
and has amended existing statutes to respond to the threats
of chemical poisons, hazardous wastes, and pesticides, and
to protect drinking water supplies. We must carefully
devise or revise enforcement strategies under the additional
provisions of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the
amended provisions of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the hazardous waste provisions
of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and
the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).
Under RCRA, our priority enforcement activities in
FY 1980/81, in addition to responding to emergencies,
include monitoring and enforcing the notification program
(Section 3010); reviewing proposed State programs for
enforceability and adequacy; issuing permits, monitoring
permitted sites, and ensuring that Compliance Schedules
are met; and monitoring and enforcing the manifest
systems.
Under TSCA, our compliance monitoring and enforcement
will initially focus on PCBs, chlorofluorocarbons, inventory
requirements and to premanufacturing notice requirements.
We will continue our special investigative efforts regarding
the accuracy and truthfulness of laboratory test data in
the toxics and pesticides programs.
Under FIFRA, during FY 1980/81 EPA will attempt to
develop cooperative enforcement grant programs with the
remaining seven States (for a total of 50) and will
continue to enforce regulations on pesticide use until
States assume this responsibility.
Under SDWA, EPA will respond to emergency situations
threatening public health and will concentrate on enforce-
ment of primary drinking water standards, particularly in
non-primary States.
Noise Control
The noise enforcement program will continue to ensure
compliance with standards and requirements for products and
procedural labeling as its top priority. Although urban
noise can often be controlled through State and local efforts,
it continues to be a Federal responsibility to ensure that
products meet the standards established under the Noise Act.
EPA Headquarters will carry out this function.
-------
- 40 -
MANAGEMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL PRIORITIES
In addition to the preceding programmatic priorities,
we have a number of management and institutional improve-
ments as top priorities. These improvements have to some
degree already been described in the programmatic priorities
and they obviously interrelate with them.
o Consolidated Permitting -- EPA will consolidate
and simplify its permitting activities, mostly
during FY 1979 and totally by the end of FY 1980.
It will assist and encourage States to do so as
well.
o Industry Enforcement Strategies — During FY 1979
and FY 1980 EPA will develop and implement industry
enforcement strategies for selected industries.
o Continuous Compliance — We will develop programs
for ensuring continuous compliance by regulated
sources, including compliance monitoring (and
information systems for recording and tracking
compliance), penalties to remove the economic
benefit of non-compliance and remote sensing
techniques.
o Improved Oversight of State Enforcement -- During
FY 1979 and thereafter, Headquarters and Regional
personnel will begin to apply standards of perfor-
mance to State enforcement activities under all
Federal grants or contracts for enforcement.
o Management and Management Information Systems —
During FY 1979 and FY 1980 as needed, we will
review our management, reporting, and information
systems (including ADP systems). Our emphasis will
be on improved accuracy, usefulness, simplicity,
and compatability.
o Improved Cooperation with Other Agencies —
During FY 1979, 1980, and 1981, we will improve
our cooperation with other agencies, such as the
Department of Justice, the other members of the
IRLG (OSHA, FDA, and CPSC), the Securities Exchange
Commission (SEC), and the Departments of Energy and
Interior.
-------
- 41 -
Innovative Methods — Throughout FY 1979, 1980,
and 1981 the Office of Enforcement will explore
innovations such as widened use of penalties to
remove economic benefits of delay, environmental
auditing, and contracts or grants with citizen
groups.
Investigating Criminal Violations — During
FY 1980/81 EPA enforcement will improve its
ability to investigate criminal violations of
environmental laws by recruiting and training
EPA investigative personnel.
-------
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
Overview Statement of Priorities and Goals
Stephen J. Gage, Assistant Administrator
During the next two years, three major objectives will
be driving the Environmental Protection Agency's research
and development program: (1) continuing the integration of
the Office of Research and Development into the mainstream
of the Agency's activities, (2) enhancing the Office's
capability to provide the scientific and tecnnological data
the Agency will use fo" future regulatory and enforcement
actions, and (3) improving that data through scientific peer
review of research procedures and results, quality control
of risk assessments, and quality assurance of monitoring
data.
Much of the groundwork for achieving these objectives
has been laid durinq the past year. The Research Committees
have been quite successful in planning research in five
critical areas jointly with the Program Offices. A signifi-
cant Public Health Research Initiative ($37 million, 46
positions) was developed and successfully defended with
OMB through the cross-agency zero-based budgeting for toxics.
A new Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, building
on the successful experiences in scientific assessments by
the Carcinogen Assessment Group and the Environmental
Criteria and Assessment Office, has been proposed. Other
developments have also built a good foundation for future
action.
INTEGRATING ORD INTO THE_AGENCY'S MAINSTREAM
Joint planning of the Agency's research and development
activities tnrough the five pilot Research Committees already
provides a very valuable linkage between the regulatory
program offices responsible for developing regulations and
the ORD scientists and engineers supporting the regulatory
efforts. During early 1979, we will establish seven new
Research Committees to cover the joint planning of sub-
stantially all of the research in support of regulation and
enforcement. Each of the 12 committees will be specifically
oriented to the users of the research information, typically
Program Office Deputy Assistant Administrators or, in some
instances, Division Directors (see Attachment A).
-------
- 43 -
The new Research Committees will develop multi-year
research strategies oriented toward supporting regulatory
needs; identify research outputs required within the next
budget year (now beginning the FY 1981 cycle); seek the
required resources through the Agency's ZBB process; and
monitor and evaluate ongoing and completed research. We
must make special efforts during this formative period
to bring more fully the Agency's enforcement and Regional
programs into the joint planning process. In the interest
of cost-effectiveness, it will oe necessary for the Regional
Offices to coordinate their participation and share respon-
sibility for representing Regional interests in the Research
Committee; ORD will support the Regional Offices in this
effort.
We will continue to experiment cautiously with matrix
management approaches as a means of improving the coordi-
nation and delivery of high-visibility, short-term research
outputs. Matrix management of the diesel emissions program
will continue, and we will consider establishing a limited
number of similar programs, such as in Acid Precipitation.
Closely related to the evolution of the joint research
plannng approach is the long-overdue simplification of
ORD'S planning and reporting systems. We must take this
step to bring ORD's planning and management approaches into
synchronization with (1) the five-year plan developed in the
preparation of the Agency's Research Outlook, (2) the multi-
year plans developed by the Research Committees, and (3) the
Agency's ZBB review and decisions. We must also eliminate
the redundant paperwork that absorbs too much ORD staff time,
In order to improve accountability for the research
and development efforts, we must bring into operation a
reliable tracking system for the critical outputs required
by the Program Offices as identified by the Research
Committees. As a corollary, we must also reduce to a
manageable number the outputs to be tracked. While we must
have adequate information to monitor progress of the key
outputs, we must vigorously resist spending too much time
and effort reporting preliminary and fragmented data. Good
research management means monitoring the right indicators,
not all of trie possible indicators, of orderly progress
toward objectives. Too much reporting together with
overspecification of research investments will counterpro-
ductively tie the hands of the research managers and stifle
innovative research. Management flexibility nust, of
course, be coupled with accountability.
-------
- 44 -
With the increased pressure for higher quality manage-
ment of several key research areas, we will be realigning
the laboratory reporting relationships to consolidate
functional or discipline groupings. These changes, which
should improve morale and productivity, will allow us to
improve the implementation of the Agency's research efforts.
Specifically, the realignment will establish an office for
health effects research management; an office to integrate
environmental transport, fate, and effects research; and an
office to integrate control technology and hazardous waste
research.
BUILDING A RESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR AN IMPROVED DATA BASE
We made important progress in the past year in starting
the long-term process of building a foundation for a signifi-
cantly improved scientific and technological data base for
the future regulatory and enforcement actions of the Agency.
Planning and budgeting the Public Health Research Initiative
was a critical first step, but it was only a beginning.
We must now commit ourselves to the detailed planning
and implementation of the Initiative. Since the Initiative
represents the first significant expansion of the Agency's
basic environmental health sciences, we must wisely dedicate:
it to achieving a solid understanding of human health effects
caused by both direct and indirect environmental exposures.
Because we will be drawing heavily on scientific talent in
the private sector to assist us in this effort, we must
begin immediately to seek the best scientific advice
available to help us in this planning effort.
The second critical step, a broad environmental
research initiative, must be taken immediately. Because
of the heightened awareness in the Administration of
EPA's requirements for the best scientific and techno-
logical data that can be developed for the Agency's
comprehensive environmental regulations, we now have an
excellent opportunity to seek a government-wide review of
environmental research. This review will focus on how
existing and future Federal resources can support broader
based, longer term environmental research to build an
improved data base. We must assume the leadership in
developing the conceptual framework for such efforts,
bringing to bear on the program design the best scientific
advice available. We must look to the Agency's Science
Advisory Board, the President's Office of Science and
-------
- 45 -
Technology Policy, and the National Academy of Sciences as
well as numerous individual scientists in this comprehensive
planning and review effort. We are now in the process of
developing a select set of initiatives for 1981 and beyond,
focusing on protecting humans from environmentally mitigated
pollutants; identifying and protecting critical components
of ecosystems from injury; and addressing the more global
problems of protecting our life support systems.
In parallel with these activities, we must carefully
review the longer-term research already underway in ORD to
assure ourselves that f..e are directing our attentions to
the most important future problems and are using the best
scientific talent we can attract to work on these problems.
We must determine if we are obtaining high quality, well-
documented results from our research grants -- the primary
mechanism we have for supporting innovative ideas. We must
make the scientific community more widely aware of our
research grants, encourage much greater competition for
those grants, and ensure that they are awarded strictly on
the basis of merit through enhanced peer review. We should
also see if alternative approaches for handling these longer
term grants can relieve the burdensome monitoring loads
placed on the individual laboratory researchers.
An invigorated, competitive grant program for longer-
term research in each research area, coupled with an expanded
Anticipatory Research Program, will provide the Agency with
an important new base of exploratory research. It is
essential that, with the significant infusion of new funding
associated with the Public Health Research Initiative, we do
not waste this opportunity to build a firmer foundation with
the help of the best scientific talent available in the
country.
IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF DATA USED IN DECISION MAKING
Scientific and technological data come in many forms
and in varying quality. The credibility and integrity of
all data used in Agency decisions is a prerequisite for
any analyses. The evaluation and synthesis of the data is
an essential step in informing the many far-reaching
regulatory decisions. We have made significant progress
during the last year in providing carcinogenic risk
assessments for the Program Offices and in improving the
capability of ORD to prepare Air and Water Quality criteria
documents by establishing the new Environmental Criteria and
Assessment Offices in Research Triangle Park and Cincinnati.
-------
- 46 -
We have not yet, however, undertaken the special
responsibility assigned by the Administrator to provide
quality control of the Agency's risk assessments. With
approval of ORD's new Office of Health and Environmental
Assessment (OHEA), we must now move ahead, first to quickly
develop guidelines for the several types of risk assessments
required for the Agency's regulation development, and then
to exercise oversight to ensure that the asssessments
prepared by the Program Offices conform reasonably to the
guidelines. We must also proceed to staff OHEA with the
best qualified people we can attract from the scientific
community, significantly upgrading in this process ORD's
capability to provide consultation to the Program Offices
and, upon request, assessments of specific chemicals.
Although we in ORD have discussed the role of peer
review extensively during the past year, we must now
act in the coming year to build into all of the Agency's
scientific and technological efforts appropriate review
mechanisms. We must begin with enhanced peer review for
individual research projects. The ORD senior laboratory
management must convey to the professional staff strong
support for and assistance in periodic external peer
review of individual projects. Whenever feasible, the
results of individual projects should be subjected to
rigorous scientific or technological scruntiny through
publication in referred journals. We should also see
that the results of our grants and contracts are published
in peer-reviewed journals, slowing the growth of that body
of EPA-published "gray literature" which now constitutes
the only publication channel for too much of our work.
Publication of research results in the peer-reviewed
literature must become an important criterion for advance-
ment in all of our laboratories.
In addition to peer review of individual research
efforts, we must systematically review our research programs,
While such reviews may begin at the laboratory level, it is
usually more appropriate to conduct them at the level of the
Deputy Assistant Administrators or even of the Assistant
Administrator. Since the Research Committees will be
providing the primary focus for the bulk of our research
activities, it is logical that we direct our attention
increasingly to programmatic reviews along the lines of the
committees. We should also be mindful of other mutually
supporting programmatic areas which may provide results for
several committees, such as biological screening tests,
analytical methodologies, etc.
-------
- 47 -
Finally, we have been expanding in the past year our
efforts to provide support to Agency laboratories for
quality assurance of environmental monitoring data. We must
now assume the lead for improving the quality assurance of
all of the environmental monitoring data used in the Agency's
decisions. We must first make sure our house is in order
by requiring adequate quality assurance practices for all
environmental quality monitoring, sampling, and analytical
activities conducted in the ORD laboratories or by our
contractors or grantees. This policy should become effective
immediately. We must also require, through the Blue Ribbon
Monitoring Task Force, similar quality assurance practices
for all of the Agency's laboratories, contractors, and
grantees. Lastly, we must work closely with the Regional
Offices to bring quality assurance practices into uniform
use in all of the State and local laboratories, which
provide the bulk of the environmental quality data available
to the Agency.
-------
OFFICE OF PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
Overview Statement of Priorities and Goals
William Drayton, Jr., Assistant Administrator
The Agency's central management objective remains that
of creating a national environmental program that derives
strength and initiative from decentralization and purposive-
ness and environmental coherence from effective integration.
Toward these and other ends we must strengthen our analytic
and common services in a number of areas. This guidance
deals first with that central objective, then with other
objectives connected with our analytic and common services.
AN INTEGRATED,
DECENTRALIZED PROGRAM
From its inception EPA rejected the top-down, over-
centralized, untrusting Louis XIV/Herbert Hoover form of
management common to most government organizations, a form
that has failed. Instead we are building on the philosophy
of the Federalist Papers: decentralize and democratize
within a realistic set of incentives designed to ensure
organizationally responsible results.
Not only are we doing what makes sense for EPA, but ™
we're setting the pace for others. That's why others in
the government have quickly recognized so many of our
reforms as models.
No matter how satisfying being out front is, however,
it doesn't make ground breaking any easier. Although
we've come a long way, we still have several years of
intense work ahead of us:
(1) We should continue to strengthen our regulation
development and zero-base budgeting. They
provide the structure that makes possible broad
involvement in the Agency's two principal cross-
cutting areas for decision making: respectively, ,,
(a) regulation and policy development and (b)
priority setting, management, and resource allo-
cation. Regulation development is mature, and
ZBB is over the worst of its start-up pains.
Both need continuing adjustment and strong support. *
-------
- 49 -
The Regions should contribute more heavily to
regulation development and review, especially
regarding operational and resource issues.
Last year ZBB focused heavily on process;
henceforth it should focus more on substantive
analysis: getting workload analysis fully
implemented, finding efficiencies, developing
new program initiatives, and re-examining older
programs carefully. We must also continue to
help Office of Management and Budget develop
cross-agency ZDri.
(2) We need both stronger State programs and
stronger State/EPA collaboration. State and
local officials now staff 85 percent of the
national environmental regulatory effort, and
we are seeking to delegate even more. We must
strengthen our joint environmental management
effort, especially in the following areas:
We have more than doubled the Federal grant
support to State and local units since 1977
(including the addition of the Clean Water
Act, Section 205(g) funds).
Our new State/EPA agreements should become
more than contracts: they should induce
joint planning and they should press
decision making up to the senior policy
officials on both sides. This should make
it easier to refocus programs as our needs
change and to innovate and integrate. By
1981 the agreements should cover all our
programs.
We must win passage for and then implement
our Integrated Environmental Assistance
legislation to give the States the flexibility
and added resources for such refocusing,
innovation, and integration.
We should encourage personnel interchange
and training, e.g., through group IPA's.
(3) Our Regional Administrators must strengthen
their management/analytic capacity so that
they can better manage their Regions, lead
and evaluate the State and local agencies in
-------
- 50 -
their areas more effectively, and participate
equally in Agency-wide policy and management
decision making. Unless the Regions' ability
to think and manage is strong, both Regional
decentralization and EPA's linkage with State
and local government are at risk. Headquarters
analytic units must help the Regions develop
this capacity, and both sides should build
strong, continuing ties.
(4) Our managers should adopt Agency-wide career
paths. True independence, based ultimately
on the real ability to move if frustrated,
will flow from the professional breadth,
self-confidence, and reputation such mobility
will foster. It will also give the Agency a
management team with Agency-wide environmental
perspective and loyalty, a critical step in our
successful integration.
(5) The Agency's grantees, programs, and managers
should be held accountable for their perfor-
mance. We do not do this core management task
at all well now. Our new personnel performance
evaluation and reward program -- probably our
most demanding management reform for the next
12 to 18 months — will make major difference.
Our review of monitoring and the new Regional
Profiles may help. OUr fundamental scrutiny
and rationalization of our many computer-based
information systems will help. A systematic
regiment of evaluations beginning at the local
and State levels and working up is critical.
Such evaluations should be backed by a reformed
reporting system and tied to the promises made
in ZBB. Designing and implementing a practical,
integrated, limited-cost way of holding the
States' and our own decentralized managers
accountable is a difficult, missing part of our
management construction.
RESPONSIVE,
EFFICIENT SERVICES
We will continue implementing a number of fundamental
improvements in the Agency's services in 1980-81:
-------
- 51 -
(1) We must begin to manage EPA's personnel. The
new Civil Service Reform Act only makes this
possible: we will have to make it happen by
changing the way each of our managers does his
or her most important job.
(2) We will begin pilot tests of contracting reform
in 1979 to improve responsiveness and cut
processing time.
(3) The Agency will commit to new computers after
a thorough management review of our data needs
and of our existing and planned programs.
A SMART AGENCY
Our analytic services — directly supporting our top
managers, helping prepare regulations, checking budget
pricing, providing legal or economic analyses, negotiating
with other agencies, and the like — must keep up with a
growing workload and maintain a superior level of pro-
fessional quality. Compromise here is foolish.
We must continue our leadership in regulatory reform.
Finding more effective, equitable, and economical ways of
doing our work is one of the most useful, highly leveraged
opportunities open to us. (Further, as America's largest
regulatory agency, we have a responsibility to lead. Our
two most important reforms are controlled trading and tools
for regulatory decision making, including benefits analysis.
Once we set a standard for controlled trading of
clean-up requirements, we can allow those we regulate to
find more efficient ways of achieving the same (or better)
environmental result. These alternatives must also be as
administrable and enforceable as our initial approach.
Offsets (in both non-attainment and PSD areas), the bubble,
banking, brokerage, and perhaps marketable rights should
gradually all fit together into an increasingly important
complement to traditional "command and control" regulation.
If we can make this approach work on a wide scale, we will
provide our first positive incentive for control technology
innovation and significantly reduce clean-up costs (and
therefore resistance to clean-up).
-------
- 52 -
To strengthen both performance and accountability
we should strengthen our program evaluation capacity at
all levels. We should also play a stronger leadership
role in Administration debates on both economic and energy
policies; the best defense is a more sensible alternative.
-------
1980/1981 AIR MEDIA GUIDANCE
-------
AIR
MEDIA OVERVIEW
Planning Assumptions
New Source Review (
will have EPA appro
for Prevention of S
During FY 80, Regio
review of PSD permi
pal Regional Office
maintaining an over
grams with little o
EPA will make maxinuKra
support in conduct!
vities in 1980 unti
will utilize Sectio
assistance.
Headquarters and Re
specific expertise
policy and guidance
implementing the PS
Regional overview f
ticular attention t
adjoining States,,
assistance from Hea
in mediating/arbitr
state impact on gro
particularly in hig
The promulgation of
requirements to inc
dioxide, and volati
will be completed b
Radiation (OANR) by
support the States
policy in the revie
control technology
a clearinghouse for
During FY 80/81, th
SR)_ — In FY 80, most States
ed State Implementation Plans
gnifleant Deterioration (PSD).
al Offices will curtail their
applications with the princi-
role in FY 81 being one of
lew of State and Local pro-
no direct EPA permit issuance.
utilization of contractor
g required permit review act.i-
, State plans are approved and
105 grant funds to secure such
ional Offices will provide
and interpretation of Agency
(ex. modelling) to States in
program. In addition, the
.motion in FY 81 will give par-
assuring consistency between
he Regional Offices with
Iquarters will be involved
ating issues relative to inter-
th plans and use of the increment
growth areas.
regulations expanding PSD
ude carbon monoxide, nitrogen
e organic compound emissions
7 Office of Air, Noise, and
the end of FY 80. OANR will
fforts to insure consistent
of new source permits and
leterminations by maintaining
these decisions.
e number of New Source Performance
Standard promulgations by OANR will be greatly
increased. These new emission limits will provide a
general basis for determining required case-b', --^atvj
Best Available Control Technology (BACT) by either
the State or Regional Office for sources subject
to PSD.
-------
56 -
In those States not delegated New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS), National Emission Standard for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS) or having an
approved SIP for PSD, Regional Offices will con-
tinue to verify the compliance and initiate enforce-
ment action against new sources including Federal
facilities subject to NSR requirements which are in
violation of procedural, permit, or emission require-
ments .
The Office of Air, Noise and Radiation and the
Office of Enforcement in FY 80 will develop procedures
for the overview and audit of State new source review
activities including engineering determinations,
modelling, public notification, surveillance, and
enforcement to assure new source compliance with both
procedural and emission requirements. This review
will also include adequacy of procedures for tracking
increment utilization, growth and impact on air
quality including Reasonable Further Progress in
attaining standards.
The consolidation of EPA new source permitting
programs will continue in 1980. Inclusion of the
air permits into the consolidated program where
direct Regional Office permitting activities are
still necessary will occur in FY 81.
Carbon Monoxide and Ozone (CO/03) — During FY 80,
the review and possible revision of the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for CO will
be completed. It is expected that if there is a
revision to the CO standard, it will not signicantly
change the number of major urban nonattainment areas
where the development and implementation of trans-
portation measures (including automobile inspection/
maintenance (I/M)) by the States would be necessary to
attain the standard by 1987.
In FY 80 followup actions to remedy deficiencies in
the 1979 SIP submissions will be completed by most
States and reviewed by Regional Offices. Also, the
schedules contained in the 1979 SIP for develop.! ng
mandatory I/M programs, conducting a transportauinn
control planning process, and enacting additional
volatile organic compound (VOC) regulations consis-
tent with the Control Technology Guideline (CTG)
documents will be met by most States in both FY 80/81.
Regional Offices will track the progress of States
in meeting these schedules with major guidance being
-------
- 57 -
provided in the development of the transportation
planning process in urban areas greater than 1,000,000
population, and the development of mandatory I/M
programs. The appropriation by Congress of any
additional Section 175 monies for support of the
transportation planning process is not expected in
FY 80 or 81.
Development of a regional ozone model will be completed
by the Office of Research and Development (ORD) in
FY 81 with support from OANR. The model will serve
as a major tool in developing the appropriate strat-
egies by States for inclusion in the 1982 SIP sub-
mission for those major urban nonattainment areas
having an extension that are experiencing extensive
air quality violations and which will require imple-
menlation of complex and costly control measures to
attain by 1987,, Use of the model will require in
FY 1980 the development by the States of extensive
data bases within these areas (i.e., emissions, air
quality, meteorology!. The establishment of National
Air Monitoring Stations (NAMS) for ozone and the
quality assurance of the data from these stations
should be completed by the States to provide the
ambient data necessary for model application.
Verification of compliance and initiation of necessary
enforcement action by the States against existing
stationary sources subject to the new VOC emission
limits included in the 1979 SIP and the additional
regulations required to be enacted by January 1980
will commence. Regional Offices will work with
States to develop a strategy for these sources and
oversee State efforts to verify and secure compliance.
The Regions will initiate necessary enforcement action
where States fail or cannot act or request EPA
assistance. The 1979 SIP is expected to increase
the number of major VOC sources subject to the SIP
by 3,000 with an estimated 6,000-8,000 additional
sources anticipated by the end of FY 81.
In FY 80, enforcement by EPA of anti-tampering and
fuel switching requirements in areas requiring man-
datory I/M programs will be initiated by Mobile
Source Enforcement Division (MSED). These actions
will assist in reducing the costs to the public of
passing a mandatory vehicle inspection. States will
be encouraged to enforce existing State anti-tampering
or fuel switching regulations or to develop regu-
lations if none exist.
-------
- 58 -
In FY 80, both EPA Regional Offices and the States
will establish more effective measures for informing
the public and securing public participation in the
strategy development and implementation process
particularly as it relates to the transportation
planning process and mandatory I/M programs.
Procedures will be established and implemented by
OANR to insure consistent application of sanctions
nationwide as required by Sections 176 and 316 of
the Clean Air Act where States fail to enact or
carry out necessary controls for the attainment of
NAAQS.
The development and promulgation of additional mobile
source emission standards required by the Clean Air
Act will be completed by OANR in FY 80.
Total Suspended Particulates and Sulfur Oxides
(TSP and SOX) — In FY 80, the required review of
NAAQS for TSP and S02 will be completed by OANR with
necessary revisions to be promulgated by EPA in FY 81.
The review of the TSP standard may result in the
promulgation of new primary ambient standard for
inhalable particulates (IP) and subsequent secondary
ambient standards for sulfates and fine particulates
during FY 81. The modification and promulgation of
additional TSP/S02 standards will require major State
efforts to revise the SIP in FY 81 with completion
required in FY 82. In FY 80, efforts to refine the
definition of the nature and extent of the TSP prob-
lem in urban nonattainment areas where re-entrained
fugitive dust is a major element will be conducted
by both ORD and the States in anticipation of the
new standards.
By the beginning of FY 80, all State or EPA-initiated
civil/criminal actions associated with the Major Source
Enforcement Effort (predominantly TPS and SO2 sources)
will have been undertaken with decisions either by
settlement, administrative process, or trial completed
by the end of FY 80 and disposition of appeals com-
pleted as early as possible in FY 81. The compliance
of Federal facilities with existing SIP requirements
will also be completed by EPA or the States by the
end of FY 80. States in FY 80 will assume a larger
role in securing and maintaining the compliance of
Federal facilities.
-------
- 59 -
Delegation to the States of the non-compliance
penalty program (Section 120) initiated by EPA in
FY 79 will be undertaken in FY 80 and accelerated
in FY 81. It is estimated that the program will be
delegated to 15 percent of the States in FY 80 and
to 30 percent in FY 81.
In those cases where the States have not accepted
delegation for the non-compliance penalty program by
FY 81, Section 105 grant funds will be utilized by
EPA for implementing the program. These funds will
provide contractor assistance for implementing the
program to minimize impact on available EPA resources
in assessing penalties.
In FY 80/81 new programs devoted to ensuring that
major TSP/SO2 sources that have obtained or are
presently in compliance remain in compliance will be
initiated both by EPA and the States. OE will
complete development of an improved program in FY 80
in consultation with the States and then secure
State plans for implementing the improved program
with the States focusing first on a limited number of
selected troublesome sources.
Toxics — During FY 1980/81 emphasis on control of
hazardous pollutants will increase as result of the
Air Carcinogen Policy. Promulgation of NESHAP
standards will be accelerated. NESEAPS for benzene
and arsenic are currently olanned for Py 1980/Rl.
Goals/Priorities/Obj ectives
The goal of the program is to protect public health
and welfare through a combination of national efforts
which provide for consistent and timely progress in
rectifying existing air pollution problems and avoiding
new ones.
With respect to priorities, States were required '.o
submit revised Implementation Plans in January 19/0
outlining their strategies for attaining ambient air
quality standards in designated nonattainment areas.
High priority will be given to correcting deficiencies
in these SIPS and to providing adequate guidance to
States in developing and implementing additional pro-
grams required for the attainment of standards. High
priority will also be given to review of ambient air
quality standards and development of supporting
analyses for revisions to the standards.
-------
- 60 -
Emphasis will be given to a program obtaining State
acceptance of full responsibility of all New Source
Review activities, providing adequate guidance for
development of PSD SlPs and maintaining an effective
national clearinghouse for NSR decisions. The
clearinghouse will, be used by both Regions/States to
assure consistent policy in conducting NSR.
The NSPS program will receive increased funding in
FY 80, thereby allowing work to begin on all NSPS
on schedules consistent with the statutory deadline.
When an Air Carcinogen Policy has been established,
development of NESHAP53 consistent with that policy
will become a priority item,
In FY 80 priority wjs • be given to establishment of
technically sound NAMS/SLAMS and implementation of
quality assurance measures to establish increased
credibility to air dala,
Development of regulations for PSD Set II and
visibility will receive priority in FY 80.
The highest priority in the mobile source program is
the support of I/M implementation by States and the
development of requisite technical information on
evolving aspects of 1/M programs, such as its appli- •
cability to newer technology control systems. Also
of importance will be the completion of the standard-
setting activities mandated by the Clean Air Act, and
the implementation of controls necessary to assure
public health protection.
During FY 1980, many standard-setting activities will
result in final rulemaking. It is expected that
during FY 1981 the standard-setting program will shift
its priority focus to the control of hazardous pollu-
tants, bioactive materials, and emissions under non-
FTP conditions.
Enforcement priorities include:
*
o Enforcement actions in emergency situations
involving substantial threats to public
health and safety,
o Major Source Enforcement Effort against
violators of the Clean Air Act.
-------
- 61 -
o Enforcement against automibile/truck pollution.
anti-tampering
fuel switching
inspection and maintenance program
o Fuel compliance by Federal Facilities.
o Review for enforceability in FY 1980/81 with
respect to any continuing SIP revision work
o Section 120 noncompliance penalities
o Major source compliance with SIP revisions, and
enforcement of NSPS and NESHAPS
o Improved program of compliance monitoring and
enforcement to assure continuous compliance
Regional priorities are set forth in the Regional Guidance
section.
The objectives of the Air Program Regional Activities in
1980 and 1981 are to:
o Assure attainment of standards in accord with
the approved SIP schedules
o Assure consistent application of the law in all
States
o Increase the State responsibilities in new source
review
o Initiate enforcement actions in all appropriate
emergency situations
o Complete all civil/criminal action associated
with the Major Source Enforcement Effort
o Implement effective inspection and maintenance,
anti-tampering, and fuel switching program
o Initiate civil/criminal actions and impose
noncompliance penalties against all appropriate
major sources in violation of SIP standards,
NSPS, and NESHAPS
o Perform annual evaluations/audits of State
enforcement programs
-------
- 62 -
o Improve and have at least quarterly updates of
CDS
o Assure full compliance by Federal Facilities
o Followup on all enforcement actions and
compliance schedules
HEADQUARTERS PLAN
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS)
There are no major redirections from the President's
budget in FY 80. Major program changes took place in
FY 79 with the establishment of an accelerated program
to develop New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
relying on contract support. This accelerated program
will continue in FY's 80 and 81 to meet the requirements
of the CAA Amendments of 1977. In 1980 we will propose
ambient standards for N02/ particulate matter, and
sulfur oxides and promulgate NAAQS for carbon monoxide.
All standard reviews and revisions, where required, are
to be completed by the end of calendar year 1980. As a
follow-up to the review of the TSP and S02 standards,
OAQPS expects to initiate a program for the development
of secondary ambient air quality standards for fine
particulates and sulfates. Substantial increases in
the level of analytic support for NSPS, NESHAPS, and
ambient standard actions have significantly increased
costs and time requirements. This will require some
reprogramming in FY 1980 with continued funding in
FY 1981. As part of the analytic effort OAQPS will
increase its emphasis on identifying benefits to
complement the standard-setting process. The esta-
blishment of an Air Carcinogen Policy early in FY 80
will provide a basis for OAQPS to increase emphasis
on development of new NESHAPS.
OAQPS has assigned a very high priority in FY 80 to
approval of State programs for PSD. To support this
effort a clearinghouse for New Source review decisions
is being developed in OAQPS and will be available in
FY 80 for use by Regions/States to ensure consistent
and timely issuance of permits. In FY 80 EPA will
develop a program to consolidate its own air and water
permit programs in the few remaining States where EPA
has not yet achieved its objective of securing State
permit programs. This program will be initiated in FY 81.
-------
- 63 -
In FY 1980 OAQPS will expand the PSD program to
include the development, proposal, and promulgation
of regulations and supporting guidance to address
visibility and automotive pollutants. Studies will
be conducted on methods of assuring visibility levels
and models for measuring visibility degradation.
OAQPS efforts will continue to develop the improved
63 modelling techniques that will provide a basis
for 1982 SIP submissions. Also, OAQPS will carry
out studies to support the anticipated shift to an
inhalable particulate standard.
In FY 80 and 81 OAQPS will increase its emphasis on
public participation and public awareness. OAQPS
will hold public meetings and hearings to allow more
public participation in the standard-setting process.
Public awareness will be enhanced by the dissemination
of additional fact sheets that explain in everyday
language our intent in regulating air pollution from
stationary sources.
In FY 80 we will work with the regions to assure
that NAMS sites are established in accordance with
criteria, that instrumentation not meeting specifi-
cations is replaced, and that quality assurance programs
are incorporated in the operation of the sites.
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control (QMSAPC)
There are no major redirections in FY 80 from the
President's budget. Major program changes were
initiated in FY 1978 and implemented during FY 1979,
including major program shifts (i.e., increased
emphasis on I/M) regulatory reform measures (i.e.,
revised certification process), and contracting out
of functions. During FY 1980 and FY 1981, these
program changes will continue.
OMSAPC Program efforts will concentrate, in FY 31, on
I/M program support, completion of key regulatory
measures mandated by the Clean Air Act, and control
of hazardous pollutants. "No new program, organization /
or legislation initiatives are foreseen for FY 1981.
However, we foresee new regulations in the area of
hazardous pollutants control and non-FTP condition
emissions. We also foresee a potential need to con-
trol bioactive materials if breakthroughs are made in
methodologies used to assess the health effects of
these substances.
-------
- 64 -
No significant alternatives for carrying out the
program are foreseen for FY 1981. Changes currently
being implemented will be consolidated by FY 1981.
Additional changes may be identified in the distant
future, but it is more likely that FY 1981 will
represent a period of consolidation rather than
large-scale changes.
Office of Transportation and Land Use Planning (OTLUP)
The activities that OTLUP plans to carry out during
FY 1981 fall into the categories listed below.
Priority will be given to assuring reasonable progress
towards the 1982 plan submittals for 60 large urban
nonattainment areas.
o Implement policy guidance for the appli-
cation of sanctions under Sections 176 and
316
o Develop new technical guidance and revise
existing guidance for developing the
transportation element of State Implementa-
tion Plans and for analyzing the air quality
and other (e.g., economic, energy, etc.)
consequences of transportation and land use
measures
o Implement a monitoring program to track
State progress in: 1) preparing selected
portions of the 1982 plan submittals and
2) completing the reasonably available
transportation measures contained in the
1979 plan submittal
o Develop guidance for strengthening portions
of SIPs dealing with growth forecasting and
management, tracking of reasonable further
progress, and alternative analyses for
new sources
o Implement demonstration projects to establish
institutional structures for reconciling
differences between urban air quality and
economic development goals
o Implement a monitoring program to evaluate
the effectiveness of the use of Section 175
funds
o Develop policies for coordinating federally
sponsored planning programs
-------
- 65 -
Stationary Source Enforcement Division (DSSE)
As in the past, DSSE provides national program management
to the Stationary Source Enforcement Program, and also,
serves as a coordinating center for Regional and State
stationary source enforcement functions. Further, DSSE
establishes program direction and strategy, and helps
assure nationally consistent enforcement of the Regional
and State programs, provides support and guidance to
Regions and States, and assesses the effectiveness of
the nationwide program and recommends corrective measures.
Also, DSSE coordinates with other agencies on matters
impacting this program. The following are DSSE's planned
tasks and responsibilities for FY 80/81.
Respond in Emergency Situations
o Provide legal/technical assistance in Section 303
emergencies.
Ensure Compliance by Major SIP Sources
o Support Major Source Enforcement Effort
Expedite initiation of litigation by Regional
offices and review and make recommendations on
referral to Department of Justice (DOJ).
Track and expedite processing of litigation actions
through DOJ/U.S. Attorneys to ultimate disposition.
Provide legal/technical assistance in conduct
of litigation.
Participate in litigation coordination teams.
Participate in development of enforcement
strategies for selected source categories.
o Review, Interpretation, and Develop Regulations
Make applicability determinations for Delayed
Compliance Orders (DCOs).
Review new and revised SIPs and DCOs with national
significant issues.
Implement Section 120 (Noncompliance Penalty)
regulations.
Implement of Section 119 (Primary Nonferrous
Smelter Order) regulations.
-------
- 66 -
- Provide advice and guidance to Regions and partici-
pate in implementation of Section 125 (Measures to
Prevent Economic Disruption or Unemployment) and I
Section 126 (Interstate Pollution Abatement).
Develop policy on flue gas conditioning as a means
of interim compliance.
o Manage Compliance Monitoring Program
Provide contractor assistance
Manacre and update compliance data system
Manage NSPS and NESHAPS Enforcement Program
o Review and refer NSPS and NESHAP cases prior to
referral to DOJ.
o Develop enforcement inspection manuals.
o Review and interpret regulations.
Make applicability determinations for NSPS and
NESHAPS.
Review proposed regulations for enforceability.
Ensure Compliance by Federal Facilities *
o Assure compliance by all Federal sources with all
applicable requirements under the Clean Air Act.
f-
Enforce Applicable Sections of the Power Plant and Industrial
Fuel Use Act of 1978
o Coordinate with Department of Energy
o Applicability determinations
o Revise Part 55, Energy Related Regulations
o Provide guidance to Regions on coal conversion program. ,
o Review Section 113(d)(5) coal conversion DCOs.
Develop a Continuous Compliance Strategy
T
o Work with Regions, OANR, 0PM, States, and localities
to develop the needed strategy.
o Provide guidance to Regions and States.
-------
- 67 -
Mobile Source Enforcement Division (MSED)
The Mobile Source Enforcement Program is directed primarily
towards achieving compliance with motor vehicle emission
standards and fuels regulations.
In FY 80, the new mobile source enforcement strategy will
be fully implemented. The program supports inspection/
maintenance (I/M.) by retarding further emission deterior-
ation of the vehicle fleet before I/M programs are
implemented through the enforcement of the anti-tampering
and anti-fuel switching prohibitions. Public resistance
to I/M is likely to increase proportionately with the
percentage of the fleet that would ultimately fail an I/M
due to the cost of repairing emission control systems to
pass I/M. If resistance to I/M implementation is to be
minimized, tampering and fuel switching must be controlled.
This new initiative will focus on a nationally coordinated
effort of tampering and fuel switching inspections of
major new car dealerships, fleet operators, gasoline
retailers, and commercial repair facilities and support
the President's Denver Air Initiative. In FY 81, the new
strategy will be continued, and I/M audits of ongoing
programs will be conducted to assure that States are
achieving the emission reductions indicated in their SIP
revisions.
In FY 81, the plans and emphases of the Mobile Source
Enforcement Division are to:
Assure that emission control systems are not removed
or rendered inoperative.
o Continue the new mobile source enforcement
strategy by conducting anti-tampering and fuel
switching investigations in support of I/M.
o Conduct audits of ongoing I/M programs.
o Enforce unleaded gasoline regulations.
o Continue monitoring the rates of tampering and
fuel switching.
Assure that new vehicles meet emission standards.
o Continue the Selective Enforcement Auditing
program.
-------
- 68 -
o Conduct inspections of new motor vehicles and
engines at assembly plants to verify installa-
tion of proper emission control components.
o Monitor the importation of motor vehicles to
assure their compliance with Federal import
regulations.
Assure that vehicles meet emission standards in-use.
o Conduct recall investigations to determine
compliance of in-use vehicles with emission
standards and recall noncomplying classes.
o Implement the warranty regulations.
o Implement the maintenance instruction regulations.
o Implement the aftermarket parts certification
program.
o Continue to perform testing by METFac.
Assure that harmful gasoline additives are not distributed
in commerce.
o Prepare administrative decisions for waivers from
prohibitions against distribution of fuels and
fuel additives that may adversely affect vehicle
emissions.
o Enforce prohibitions.
Assure control of hydrocarbon emissions during gasoline
transfer operations.
o Conduct inspections of gasoline dispensing
facilities for installation of Stage I Vapor
Recovery equipment.
o Enforce Stage I Vapor Recovery regulations.
o Develop enforcement programs to ensure gasoline
transfer from gasoline pump to vehicle
minimizes release of hydrocarbons.
-------
- 69 -
Assure compliance with transportation control measures.
o Develop and implement policy in application of
CAA sanctions for noncompliance of SIP revisions
statutory requirements.
Administer California waivers.
o Review waiver requests.
Administer the statutory emission waivers.
o Review applications, studies conducted by NAS,
and other information to assess appropriateness
of granting waivers. Prepare administrative
decisions.
Office of Research and Development (ORD)
In FY 81 and FY 81 the research and development
program will continue to carry out its extensive
activities in support of the full range of short- and
longer-term needs of the Office of Air, Noise and
Radiation Programs. The program will include, however,
some major shifts in emphases in response to the
changing nature of the air pollution problems. The
FY 80 program has already passed through ZBB process;
its general contours have been established. Therefore,
we do not anticipate any major shifts to occur as a
result of detailed plan implementation in coordination
with the relevant research planning committees. Shifts
that do occur are expected to be at a level of resolu-
tion that will not affect the FY 80 program.
In FY 81, we do anticipate some major shifts in pro-
gram emphases that will lead to redirection of resources.
These emphases reflect certain assumptions about
national and program office concerns with respect to
the most pressing research needs. In some cases,
the emphases flow directly from a research plan,
e.g., work on inhalable particulates, in others,
they reflect ORD's attempt to get the jump on what
we anticipate to be program office needs within the
next five years.
This guidance is not exhaustive. It merely identifies
the peaks on what is the much more elaborate and
extensive topography of the complete research program.
-------
- 70 -
The exact composition of the entire research program
will be hammered out in detail in the deliberations
of the appropriate research committees. The guidance
provides only the benchmarks for that detailed planning
activity. Effective with the FY 80/81 planning cycle,
the major part of the Office of Research and Develop-
ment (ORD) planning and management system is organized
around 12 research committees. These research
committees provide the means for ORD to work jointly
with representatives of the program offices in preparing
research plans.
All of the research in support of air program regulations
in FY 80/81 is covered by the planning activities of
four committees:
1. Oxidants (includes ozone, NOX and hydro-
carbon research)
2. Gaseous and Inhalable Particles (includes
SOX, nitrates, suspended particles, and
lead)
3. Mobile Source Air Pollution
4. Hazardous Air Pollutants (includes organic
emissions as toxics, metals, such as Hg,
As, Cd, and asbestos)
For purposes of clarity and consistency, this research
guidance has been organized along the lines of the
research committee structure. Such a division can
never be totally clean. For example, field studies on
NOX and nitrates provide outputs that are valuable in
addressing both the oxidant and the inhalable particles
problem. Similarly, research on the characterization
and control of fugitive emissions can address questions
concerning both the suspended particle and the
hazardous air pollutant problem. The guidance does
not attempt to deal with this ambiguity. Rather each
major effort is assigned to a particular research
committee domain based upon that aspect of the study
which appears most critical from a programmatic
perspective.
Oxidants (Ozone, N0y, and Hydrocarbons)
In FY 81, the health effects program will continue
to focus on ozone. Studies will be undertaken to
determine conclusively the effects of low level
-------
- 71 -
exposures on the cardiorespiratory efficiency of
health exercising individuals. Also, an attempt
will be made to isolate the effects of low level
exposures to ozone on individuals suffering from
chronic lung disease, viz., asthma and bronchitis.
The effects of low level exposures on defense
mechanisms to bacterial and viral infection will also
be studied.
The program will also focus upon the potential health
effects from exposures to secondary photochemical
products such as formaldehydes, formic acid and
acrolein. The ecological effects program will carry
out studies to determine the acute and chronic effects
of exposures to ozone on important and signal plant
species. Assessment of impacts will include the
effects on productivity, quality, and basic processes
for forest and crop species and on integrated eco-
systems. Some work will continue to assess the bio-
genie emissions from vegetation and their contribution
to ambient ozone and oxidant levels.
In the transport area, the FY 81 program includes a
commitment to continue ORD's program of targeted field
studies. In addition the program includes continuation
for a major effort begun in FY 80 to assess the impact
of regional scale oxidants in the Northeast. Laboratory
studies will complement the field studies in order to
provide a more comprehensive understanding of the
atmospheric reactions that occur among ozone precursors
(volatile organic compounds and oxides of nitrogen).
The characterization program in FY 81 will continue
field and laboratory measurements to determine the
formation and distribution of secondary photochemical
products associated with mobile and stationary sources.
In the control technology area, the effort wil continue
to demonstrate NO control technology to include
industrial processes employing fuel combustion,
advanced control technology for stationary internal
combustion engines and gas turbines, and new techno-
logies for power plants.
Finally, the modelling area work will continue to
provide improvements with particular emphasis on
developing validated, multiday air quality simulation
techniques for ozone and oxidants.
-------
- 72 -
Gaseous and Inhalable Particles (includes S0y, Nitrates
suspended particles and lead
Inhalable particulates will continue to demand major
attention in the FY 81 health effects research program.
Animal toxicology studies will examine potential
chronic effects of exposure to coarse and fine particles.
Clinical studies will examine the acute effects of
exposure to combinations of particulate pollutants.
In addition, studies will continue on the acute effects
of exposures to N02, on healthy and sensitive popula-
tions, and the short- and long-term effects of exposures
to nitric acid vapor and nitrates, including the
possibility of in vivo nitrosamine formation. Finally,
the health effects program will contain a significant
effort in the area of particle epidemiology studies.
As part of the mandatory 5-year review and updating of
criteria documents, in the area of secondary air
quality standards, research will continue to improve
our ability to assess the impact of gaseous and particle
pollutants in the terrestrial environment. Long-term,
low-level chronic exposures of gaseous pollutants
acting singly and in combination need to be further
studied.
In anticipation of a possible change in the TSP
standard that may include separate consideration of
inhalable and fine particulates, the FY 81 program
will include considerable effort in the areas of
characterization and methods development, modelling,
and control technology for inhalable particles. The
program includes an extensive emissions characteri-
zation/emission factor program to provide a national
assessment of sources, concentrations, distributions,
and components of particulate matter. Control tech-
nologies will be evaluated with an emphasis upon
their removal efficiencies for inhalable size fractions
and selected chemical components.
Paralleling the characterization effort will be a
continuing program to develop particulate emission
measurement equipment and materials. This research
will address problems of continuous measurement, size
distribution, and Identification of individual com-
pounds in particle emissions. Studies will also try
to establish signatures for emissions from different
sources in order to attribute ambient air particulate
concentrations to specific sources.
-------
- 73 -
Transportation studies will include a continuing
major effort to provide validated multiday air quality
simulation models for sulfates, nitrates and other
inhalable particles. The modelling research will
attempt to provide a means for assessing the long-
range impact of particle emissions on primary
standards and visibility under the assumption that
a secondary standard for visibility may be necessary.
During FY 81, data analysis and modelling activities
in State will be emphasized using the FY 80 experi-
mental results from the PEPE field intensive study.
These results will cabstantially support the develop-
ment of a visibility standard and of air quality
transport models.
Field studies of visibility will continue to better
identify the particle species and their source that
contribute most significantly to visibility reduction.
Methods development will continue to improve the
existing instruments and techniques for quantifying
visibility and related parameters. The FY 81 modelling
program will also include a significant continuing
effort to evaluate, validate and apply an acceptable
complex terrain emissions assessment system.
The FY 81 program contains a significant effort to
deal with the problem of acid rain. The emphasis of
the program will be on the solution of those aspects
of the problem are most critical and most amenable
to solution. Most of the acid rain research will be
funded under the Anticipatory Research Program
(planned by the interdisciplinary Media), but some
ancillary applied research will be funded by base
research under the Air Media. Quality assurance in
FY 80 will continue to conduct and coordinate on-site
inspections and performance audits for the National Air
Monitoring Stations with some increased support to
EPA Regional reviews of State and Local Air Monitoring
Stations.
Exposures assessment methods will also continue to
demand a significant share of the monitoring and
measurement techniques resources for inhalable parti-
culates as well as all other air pollutants. Particular
emphasis will be given to tying together epidemiological
methods, stationary site monitoring systems, and per-
sonal monitors into compatible systems in terms of
time, space and concentrations. As part of this effort,
the FY 80 program will include the final stage of
deployment of the inhalable particle sampler network.
-------
- 74 -
Control technology research will continue to evaluate
the relative efficiencies and costs of alternative
means to control different size fractions of primary
emissions. Control of fugitive emissions will also
be investigated for priority industrial processes
as well as for problems of resuspended particles from
streets and other nonpoint sources. Associated with
the technology studies will be the development of
methods for and the actual acquisition of emissions data
from non-traditional particulate matter sources needed
for evaluating the long-term and short-term impacts of
fugitive emissions of particles.
Mobile Source Air Pollution
The FY 81 program will continue to focus heavily upon
the effort to define better the risks from diesel
emissions by means of bench and field studies. In
the characterization area, there will continue to be
a substantial demand for the collection of exhaust
products with different operating conditions, different
engine designs, and fuel types. In addition, there is
likely to be some characterization and measurement of
exhaust products from candidate control systems.
Hazardous Air Pollutants (includes organic emissions as
toxics, metals such as Hg, As, Cd, and asbestos)
The FY 81 health program will also include a signi-
cantly expanded emphasis on air pollutant induced
carcinogenesis. The primary emphasis will be on
testing methods and epidemiological investigations.
The test method development will address the design
of an optimal tiered battery of tests for assessing
potential for carcinogenesis. The epidemiological
program will try to relate the incidence of cancer
observed on cancer registeries to exposure to air
pollutants. In the area of prospective epidemiology
research will focus on the development of methods to
track health status of populations subject to extra-
ordinary exposure incidents.
In addition, we expect the research on air pollutant
health effects begun under the Public Health Initiative
to continue in F!£ 81. Some of the major problems that
will continue to be addressed include: the improvement
of methods to relate animal toxicity to human clinical
-------
- 75 -
results; the development of faster, sensitive methods
to detect biochemical, genetic and immune changes; and
and epidemiological studies of selected pollutant
problems, e.g., indoor pollution, improvement of our
quantification ability with respect to exposure
characterization, and temporal exposure patterns.
The FY 81 research program will also emphasize the
characterization of hazardous organic emissions from
stationary sources—both constrained emissions from vents
and stacks and fugitive emissions. In both instances,
the characterization may require the development of
either sampling and collection methods or improved
analytical techniques, e.g., for total organic emissions
or for selected toxic substances.
Characterization activities in FY 81 will be expanded
to begin a systemmatic effort to determine the inventory
and significance of regulated air pollutants from
stationary sources. In addition, the program will
focus upon the characterization of indoor air and attempt
to relate indoor air quality to 24-hour and annual
exposures to various air pollutants.
Studies will be carried out to assess population
exposures to toxic organic vapors and particulates,
especially potential carcinogens and mutagens developing
and employing where appropriate personal monitors.
The FY 81 program will include an attempt to identify
and quantify hazardous materials associated with fugitive
dust from mining activities, transportation of materials
and industrial operations. Research will also be
carried out to characterize VOC emissions and develop
appropriate control technology. The development of
solvent collection and disposal/recovery systems will
also be pursued as well as the development of alter-
native solvents or solvent-free processes.
The control technology program will also include an
expansion of the demonstration control options for the
second round NSPS stationary sources and the effort to
generate AP 42 emission factors and cost curves for
selected control technologies and pollutants.
A final area of emphasis will be development and
deployment of monitoring systems to allow broad scan
screening of emissions and ambient air for a variety
-------
- 76 -
of toxic organics. In addition, the program allows
for some contingency to cover short-term delivery of
targeted measurement devices to deal with particular
problems, e.g., those efforts in the past to measure
vinyl chloride around PVC plants.
Technical Support
The FY 81 program anticipates a significant amount of
resources will be devoted to technical support to the
program offices. In the past, this support has been
provided, and we assume will continue to be provided,
by the ORD base program. There is no rational way to
assign specific levels of effort to each of the four
major research areas a priori. The level and distri-
bution of this technical support activity will be set
as a result of the deliberations of the respective
research committees.
Quality Assurance
Following on the major effort of FY 80, Quality Assurance
will continue to be a major concern in the FY 81 research
program. In addition to maintaining oversight over the
Agency's quality assurance system, the research program
will continue to investigate ways to improve the Agency's
Quality Assurance activities.
Exploratory Research
The new structure for planning research in the Agency
provides assurance that studies will be carried out
in the support of the regulatory programs. However,
the long-term viability of the Agency's assessment
and control of environmental problems as well as the
quality of ORD's programs depend upon a stable base
level of exploratory research. The exact nature and
amount of such research that is necessary will vary
from program to program within any medium and even
accross media. The FY 81 program for air research
assumes that 15% of the total budget will be devoted
to exploratory research, i.e., research which is not
in direct support of some existing or anticipated
regulatory need. This 15% figure appears low but
given the pressing need for research in support of
regulation, such minimum level may be necessary. In
any event, this guidance establishes this minimum
level of 15% as a base on which the research committees
can base their deliberations.
-------
_ 7 7 —
Energy
The Energy Research Program is ranked by the Energy
media team. Nevertheless, a great deal of the energy
research addresses air pollution problems. Every
attempt will be made to factor the Energy activities
into the deliberations of the Air media group. To
aid in those deliberations, the following major
emphasis of the FY 81 Energy program are provide for
reference:
Field experiments on the formation and
transport of nitrates and secondary
organic particles will continue in FY 81.
An effort will be initiated in FY 81 to
expand the geographical areas of concern
for baseline measurements of nitrates and
organic particles beyond the Ohio Valley
Region.
Continuation of the demonstration of low
NO burner technology for new and existing
industrial and utilty oil and coal-fired
boilers.
Continuation of the characterization of
particulates (including the condensible
fraction) for energy facility emissions.
Development and demonstration of dry low
cost SOX control technology for new and
exixting industrial and utility boilers.
- Continuation of the air quality monitoring
network in the East in order to establish a
baseline from which to assess the impact of
energy activities.
Finally, consultations and discussions
during FY 80 between EPA and National
Laboratory Scientists in DOE should lead
to integration of the MAP3S program into
the overall EPA-ORD research program.
-------
- 78 -
REGIONAL GUIDANCE
Air Abatement and Control—Air Quality Management
Major Priorities for FY 80
o The first level of priorities reflects activities
which all Regional Offices are expected to perform
in FY 80. Resources for FY 80 will be allocated
to Regional Offices for implementing each of these
priorities as well as to maintain an air grants
management function for Section 105 and 175 grants
and a core Regional Office base program for air
management.
o The second level of priorities reflects activities
which are required by the Clean Air Act or represent
activities for which Regional Office involvement is
considered important to the development of effective
SIPs. The Regional Offices, however, will have
flexibility to choose which of these priorities to
undertake. Resources allocated to the Regional
Office for FY 80 will not be adequate to fully carry
out every priority in this level.
o The third level of priorities reflects activities
which may be required by law but in general have
limited public health and socio-economic impacts.
In specific local circumstances, they may be signi-
ficantly important. The Regional Offices will have
flexibility to choose which of the priorities to
undertake. Resources allocated to the Regional
Office for FY 80 for allocated to the Regional
Office for FY 80 for these priorities will be very
limited.
Priority Level i
Review, Track, and Approve Fanctionable SIPs
Guide/ Review, and Approve State Plans for PSD
Coiv-ti.'.. •• n ier II Reviews for PSD where States
do rot v-uvi: an Approved PSD Plan
Guide &\ <_':e,s to Develop Transportation Planning
Fr-jcr-v a .*.r,i Transportation Control Measures in
LdtJ i'rr-.o" Nonat tuir.KVir.t Av-:as
-------
- 79 -
Audit Selected State Performed PSD Reviews
where State PSD Plan has been Approved
Act on Major Energy Related Actions (e.g.,
Fuel Conversions) which have Potential Impact
on Air Quality
Priority Level II
Guide States in Developing Mandatory I/M
Proarams
Review, Track and Approve Non-sanctionable SIPs
including Lead (Pb) and other Reauired Mis-
cellaneous SIP Revisions
Guide States in Developing Additional VOC
Regulations
Guide States in Analvzing Measures and Conduct
of Pilot Demonstrations for Control of Urban
Fugitive Dust in Manor Urban Nonattainment Areas
Guide States in Developing Lead (Pb) SIP for
Primary Lead Smelters
Review/Approve other State Initiated SIP
Revisions
Priority Level III
Promulgate Required SIP Provisions where
States Fail to Act or Correct Deficient SIPs
Guide States in Developing Transportation
Planning Process in Smaller Urban Nonattainment
Areas
Guide States in Developing other Required
SIPs for Lead (Pb)
Guide States in Developing Required SIP Revisions
Rural Nonattainment Areas
Guide States in Developing Required Miscellaneous
Revisions to the SIP
Guide, Review, Approve 111(d) Plans
-------
- 80 -
Principal Regional Activities
Review, Track and Approve Sanctionable SIPs
SIP review, tracking, and approval is a
non-discretionary function for the Regions
and the public health and economic impacts
make it especially critical for the
sanctionable SIPs. The intent here is to
prevent Regional approval/disapproval
action from delaying the SIP process and to
place increased emphasis on the Regional
management function in the SIP process.
This is a reflection of the Agency's
priority on improved management of
environmental programs. In FY 1980 the
initial nonattainment SIPs will have already
been submitted and approval/disapproval action
taken. Therefore, the most important tasks
for FY 80 will be tracking State milestones
for: I/M development; transportation
planning; VOC regulation development; urban
fugitive dust analysis; satisfying
reasonable further progress requirements as
well as reviewing and approving revisions
to the SIP resulting from the schedules.
Also included is the review and approval of
those SIPs which were given "conditional"
approvals and require follow-up actions by
the State. "Conditional•' approval here
refers to SIP regulations which were
approved subject to the condition that they
be revised in some minor aspect (e.g., cut
size, etc.) and not the SIP scheduling
provded for in Mr. Costle's February 24,
1978 memorandum. The Regions should
complete the review and approval of most of
the "conditional" approvals before the end
of FY 1980. In addition to following up on
the 1979 non-attainment SIPs, there is the
potential need for review and
approval/disapproval of SIP actions in
newly designated nonattainment areas.
Prevent. Significant Deterioration Efforts
to secure State assumption of the PSD
program and completion of individual PSD
reviews by the Regional Office where the
State has not assumed the program are
essential activities in FY 80. The
Congress clearly expected States to assume
the PSD program and the workload associated
with continued EPA responsibility for the
-------
- 81 -
program exceeds resources available for it.
It is EPA policy that Regional Office
efforts in FY 81 will be limited
principally to one of overview. Therefore,
the Regional Offices should provide
extensive guidance to States in preparing
PSD plans and, review/approve State
submitted plans. Upon approval of a State
plan, the Regional Offices should audit and
evaluate the technical adequacy of the
State program through selective
(approximately 10%) review of individual
State Tier II permits. In FY 80, EPA
Headquarters will develop more
comprehensive guidelines regarding Regional
Office roles in overviewing and auditing
State and local new source review programs
(including PSD). It is anticipated that
EPA's major interest after FY 80 would only
be with auditing those new sources which
are precedent setting or have major
inter-state impacts.
In those cases where the State cannot or
will not develop an approvable plan, the
Regional Office will continue to carry out
the BACT and modeling analysis for the Tier
II reviews. However, the conduct of Tier I
reviews should not be handled by the
Regional Offices. The purpose of the
two-tier system in PSD is to prevent
significant resources from being employed
for review of relatively minor sources. If
a new source applicant has a valid State
permit, which brings allowable emissions under
50 tons per year, Regional Offices should
not expend resources re-reviewing the
permit. Where Regional Office conduct of
Tier II reviews is required, Section 105
grant funds should be employed to obtain
contractual support to aid in the conduct
of the necessary reviews. In the conduct
of PSL/ reviews, priority consideration
should ne given to Air Quality Control
Regions (AQCR) where energy facilities are
requesting approval to construct. Within
the AQCR, reviews against the allowable PSD
increment, should continue to be conducted
on a fjrat-come-first-served basis, by the
Regional office. In interstate areas the
Regional Off:ce would need to consider the
impact of the review on a state's growth
-------
policy if one or more of the States had an
approved SIP containing a growth policy,
Guide Transportation Planning in Large Urban Areas
The special significance of transportation
control measures and their role in the
Agency's overall urban strategy require
that major Regional Office guidance be
given to the development and implementation
of the transportation planning process in
nonattainment areas for ozone/carbon
monoxide having a population in excess of
1,000,000. Regional involvement with the
Section 175 grantee agencies must continue
to ensure that these one-time grant funds
result in an EPA approvable SIP and an
effective transportation planning process.
Maintain Grants Management/Regional Office Base
As in FY 79 the Regional Office will
continue to perform essential activities
for grants management and maintain a core
Regional Office base program for managing
the Air and Hazardous Materials Division,
preparing responses to the public,
conducting public information arid
participation activities, and reviewing
draft policies and regulations. Proposals
are currently being considered in Congress
to amend solid waste legislation to require
that abandoned or closed disposal sites be
surveyed for presence of improperly
disposed hazardous wastes. With the
expectation that the surveys will uncover a
number of such cases and that the
incineration of these wastes will be a
prime measure for final disposal of the
materials uncovered, the Regional Office
air staff in FY 80 can anticipate
increasing workloads in determining if such
wastes can be safely incinerated.
During FY 80, EPA Headquarters will
evaluate a!ternatives for enhancing
Regional Office involvement in the
preparation and review of the more major
regulation development actions which will
have significant impact on EPA Regional
Office responsibilities and workloads as
well as those of State and local control
agencies. Within the air media, likely
candidates for FY 80 are the PSD
-------
- 83 -
regulations for automobile related
pollutants, regulations for visibility
protection and changes in the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Total
Suspended Particulates.
Guide for I/M Development Providing
guidance to States in the development of
mandatory I/M programs in urban
nonattaihment areas is an important
activity in FY 80. Guidance to States
should focus on implementation of the
introductory phases of the program where
full legislative authority exists. Because
of the large start-up expenditures
associated with this program, an effort
should be made to fund certain introductory
steps of I/M projects using Section 105
grants. In addition, support for training,
public information, and acquisition of data
on program effectiveness may be necessary.
Review, Track, and Approve
Nonsanctionable SIPs. Although review and
approval actions for the SIPs (e.g., other
revisions required by the Act, as well as
State initiated revisions) are
non-discretionary, their economic and
public health impacts are generally minor.
Regional Offices may choose to process them
administratively after a minimal technical
review or delay action on them until other
priorities are completed.
Other SIP Guidance^in Urban
Nonattainmelit Areas In general, the
greatest attention should be given by the
Regional Offices to guiding State
development of ozone and TSP SIPs in
nonattainrnent areas having large urbanized
populations and significant air quality
problems. The emphasis on the larger urban
areas and the most significant air quality
problems should provide the most public
health benefit. Also, it is consistent
with the Agency's urban initiatives for
providing technical assistance,
demonstration programs, and planning grants
to cities in urban nonattainment areas.
Areas of possible guidance include
development of additional VOC regulations
required to be submitted by the States in
-------
- 84 -
January 1980 and 1981; development and
implementation of the transportation
planning process in urban areas having
population between 200,000 and 1,000,000;
the development of additional TSP controls
for industrial stack and fugitive process
emissions if not included or approved in
the 1979 SIP; the analysis of possible
measures for control of urban fugitive
dust; and collection of necessary baseline
data for conduct of ozone modelling in
severe urban nonattainment areas (areas
with design value in excess of 0.20 ppm and
population of 1,500,000 or more). Guidance
on fugitive dust during FY 1980 should
focus on the need to build an adequate data
base prior to implementing any control
measures. Given the possiblity that an
inhalable particulate standard may result
from current EPA review of TSP standard,
field studies being conducted by the State
to improve the definition of the nature and
extent of the fugitive dust problem should
include the acquisition of limited data on
particle size distribution.
Guide Development of Lead SIP
Guidance to States for the development of most of
the required SIPs for Lead (Pb) should generally
be limited. However, guidance for the development
of the SIP for primary Lead smelters should receive
the most emphasis in FY 80 where such SIPs are
required. It will be particularly difficulty for
States to develop effective control measures for
smelters as part of the SIP which are reasonable
in cost. EPA has committed itself to assist the
States and the primary lead industry in developing
approvable strategies and controls and guidance
from the Regional Offices in FY 80 will be
necessary.
Promulgation of Inadequate SIPs
Promulgation of SIP strategies is generally low
priority for FY 80. However, exceptions should
be considered for those promulgations which, for
relatively few resources, would result in removing
-------
- 85 -
sanctions or would provide a significant
benefit to public health. In most cases, the
resources involved are substantial and would
duplicate money already allocated to States
in FY 79 under Section 105. To the extent
major promulgations appear to be necessary
later in FY 1980, they should be handled
through reprogramming after their policy and
resource implications have been thoroughly
analyzed by the Regional Office and the Office
of Air, Noise, and Radiation.
Abatement and Control-Ambient Monitoring
Major Priorities forFY-80 — Resources to be allocated for the
accomplishment of the priorities listed below in the three
priority levels for Ambient Monitoring are similar to the
approach for Air Quality Management. Priority I tasks will
be mandatory and Regional offices will be allocated resources
to accomplish each priority. Regional offices will have
flexibility in selecting from Priority II and III as the
resource allocation will not be adequate to carry out every
priority listed.
o Priority Level I
Prepare SIP Revision for State Network and
conduct Networks Reviev/s
- Evaluate NAMS Sites
- Submit Air Quality Data to NADB and Validate
NAMS Data
Participate in 105 Grant Negotiations
Conduct State, Agency System Audits and Prepare
Quality Assurance Program Descriptions
Conduct Data Acquisition for Special O_ Disper-
sion Modelling Efforts to Support 1982 SIP
Revisions
Conduct Data Quality Assessments
Respond to Emergency Situations
- Participate in Regional Office Lab Performance
Audits
- Prepare Regional Environmental Profiles
-------
- 86 -
o Priority Level II
Process Emissions Data
Implement Daily Index Reporting in Areas with
Population Greater than 500,000
Conduct Ambient Network Review and Analyze
Ambient Data for Critical New Sources
Conduct NAMS Performance Audits (Higher Priority
in FY 81)
Conduct SLAMS Site Evaluations in Areas with
Population Greater than 200,000
- Validate of SLAMS Air Quality Data
Coordinate Special Purpose Monitoring (Health or
SIP Related)
o Priority Level III
Review Lead SIP Network
Develop Population Exposure Analyses
Audit Small Local Agency Systems
Conduct SLAMS Site Evaluations in Areas with
Population Less than 200,000
Implement Daily Index Reporting in Areas Less
than 500,000
Conduct SLAMS Performance Audits
Coordinate Special Purpose Monitoring (Not
Health or SIP Related)
The highest priorities for FY 80 are the activities asso-
ciated with the implementation of the new air monitoring
regulations developed by the Standing Air Monitoring
Work Group (SAMWG). The most critical of these activi-
ties will be the ones involving the National Air Moni-
toring Stations (NAMS). Due to the size of the State
monitoring proarams, it is recognized that intensive
Regional Office oversight of State activities must be
limited to a subset of the total network in any one
year. Accordingly, in FY 80, Regional Offices should
emphasize the NAMS network as these sites represent
areas of highest concentrations and population exposure.
-------
- 87 -
The first step in implementing the provisions of the
revised monitoring requirements involves the State sub-
mission by January 1, 1980 and Regional review of the
SIP revision detailing the state air monitoring program.
At the time the SIP revision is submitted to the Regional
Office the States should have reviewed and redesigned
their monitoring network.
The second step in implementing the regulations involves
the review of the entire network of State and Local Air
Monitoring Stations (SLAMS network) by the Regional
Offices to identify potential NAMS sites and to document
where new or relocated sites are needed if not already
completed in FY 79. The review of the entire SLAMS
network is required to be performed on an annual basis,
to insure that the State networks remain responsive to
EPA needs.
The third step is the evaluation and documentation by
the Regional Office of identified NAMS sites including
on-site visits to determine conformance to 40 CFR 58,
Appendices C (Monitoring Methdology), D (Design
Criteria), and E (Probe Siting) followed by detailed
documentation of site descriptions. SLAMS site evalua-
tions could be conducted if the SLAMS monitor is
co-located with NAMS. Other SLAMS (not co-located with
NAMS) should be evaluated by the Regional Offices only
after all NAMS have been completed.
Regional Offices in FY 80 should conduct a quality assur-
ance system audit for all State monitoring programs. The
Regions should, to the extent possible, negotiate with
the States to audit all Local monitoring programs. In
cases where a Local monitoring program is larger than the
State program or includes all or the majority of NAMS in
the State, the Local system audit should receive a higher
priority than the State audit. During this audit, the
Regions should verify that all requirements of 40 CFR 58,
Appendix A (Quality Assurance) are being met. All EPA
Regional laboratories must participate in the Environmental
Monitoring Support Laboratory (EMSL) performance audi-
in program for Nitrogen dioxide (N02), Sulfur dioxide
(802), hi-volume flow, Carbon monoxide (CO) and Lead, if
they perform monitoring for these pollutants.
The Quality Assurance program description required by
40 CFP 58, Appendix A, must be developed by States and
approved by the EPA Regional Office no later than the
end of FY 80. This program description should address
the technical details of the State's quality assurance
policies and procedures.
-------
- 88 -
Air quality data from all SLAMS must be reported by
States to the National Air Data Bank (NADB) in FY 1980
with priority given to the validation of NAMS data.
Beginning in January, 1981, only data from NAMS will be
required to be reported by the State to NADB, but al]
air quality data will continue to be accepted. The
assessment of the quality of environmental data is con-
tinually receiving increased emphasis within the EPA;
and as a result, the Regional Offices should become
extensively involved with State programs to assess the
quality of ambient data during FY 80. Beginning in FY
81, the new monitoring regulations will require that pre-
cision and accuracy statements accompany all NAMS data
submitted to the data bank by the States.
In FY 80, Regional Offices should provide coordination
and guidance to States which will be collecting short-
term ambient and emissions data in areas where ozone
dispersion modelling will be conducted in preparation
for the 1982 SIP (i.e., urban areas with design value in
excess of 0.20 ppm and population of 1,500,000 or more).
This includes the Northwast Corridor Modelling Study and
other severe urban nonattainment areas where ozone dis-
persion models will be employed in developing the 1982
SIP revisions.
In FY 80, the review and negotiation of the Section 105
grants must be given greater attention by the Regional
Offices than in previous years. The Regional Offices
Air Monitoring staff should be actively involved in
negotiation of specific State accomplishments, includ-
ing the upgrading of networks, improving data quality,
and State participation in special monitoring studies.
For FY 80 new source review related monitoring activi-
ties are included in Priority Level II for the Regional
Office because it is expected that Regional Offices new
source review activities will decrease rapidly as States
develop PSD plans and implement the PSD program. How-
ever, some Regional involvement in the more complex or
critical PSD reviews is foreseen for FY 80 and possibly
beyond.
The activities placed in Priority Level II are of lower
priority because: (a) they generally involve the first year
of a multi-year program, (b) involve activities which are
guidance-related rather than review or management-related,
or (c) do not relate to data needed for SIPs. Activities
in Priority Level III are considered to be of lowest priority
because of either (a), (b) or (c) above, or because (d),
they involve areas of low population, or (e), they pertain
to areas that are not health-related.
-------
- 89 -
Enforcement
Of highest priority, the regional enforcement personnel
must initiate enforcement actions when needed to contain
and remove the danger in emergency situations involving
substantial threats to public health and safety.
Next to emergencies, the most important activity in
the Regions is the completion of the Major Source Enforce-
ment Effort. In FY 1980, Regions will bring the
enforcement action to decision by settlement, admini-
strative process, or court trial, including appropriate
penalties, and take or defend appeals. By the end of
FY 1980, the major source effort should be virtually
completed with only a few actions and appeals still
pending in trial or appellate courts. In FY 1981, those
enforcement actions still pending in courts should be
completed as rapidly as possible.
In FY 1980, the emphasis of the mobile source enforcement
program changes. The program intends to complement
and facilitate the I/M program by retarding further
deterioration of the vehicle fleet before I/M programs
are implemented. Public resistance to I/M is likely
to increase proportionately with the percentage of the
fleet that would ultimately fail an I/M inspection due
to the cost-related aspects of repairing emission
control components to pass I/M. If resistance to I/M
implementation is to be avoided, tampering and fuel
switching must be controlled. The new FY 1980 initiative
will focus a Headquarters (MSED) effort in support of
I/M by conducting tampering and fuel switching inspections
of major chains of automobile repair facilities, fleet
operators, new car dealerships, and gasoline retailers,
and support of the President's Denver Air Initiative.
In FY 1981, the new strategy will be continued and I/M
audits of ongoing programs by Headquarters v/ill be
conducted to assure that States are achieving the emission
reductions indicated in their SIP revisions. It is
important that the Regions recognize the priority of
mobile source enforcement program in FY 1980, especially
in the context of EPA 105 air grant negotiations. As
States are funded, the Regions will forward State reporting
requirements to Headquarters.
By the end of FY 1979, regulations will be promulgated
for Section 120 noncompliance penalties; this program
is projected to be very resource intensive. Notices
of noncompliance will be issued to most appropriate
major sources in FY 1979 but the large burden of the
resultant adjudicatory hearings and litigation will be
felt in FY 1980. Also, the Regions must advise and
assist the States to facilitate delegation of Section
120 to as many States as possible.
-------
- 90 -
By the end of 1980, it is expected that all, or almost
all, major federal facilities will be in compliance and
most minor source federal facilities as well. Regions
should see to it that all federal facilities do indeed
come into compliance as soon as possible, and no later
than the end of FY 1980.
To ensure that the gains obtained in enforcement efforts
in FY 1979 are preserved, substantial effort will be
required in FY 1980 to monitor compliance with consent
decrees entered into in FY 1979. Similarly, emphasis
will be placed on an improved program of monitoring and
enforcement to assure continuous compliance of major
sources which have obtained initial compliance. There
will be an increased emphasis on continuous monitoring
as one aspect of this effort and other approaches will
be explored as well.
Each Regional Office should assure that the States in
its Region have adequate compliance monitoring programs.
This obviously requires a close working relationship between
the Regions and States. While Regional overview
inspections provide one measure of the State's performance,
a complete picture of the adequacy of State compliance
monitoring, and the State enforcement in general, requires;
an annual on-site State evaluation/audit by EPA. The
compliance monitoring part of the evaluation will allow
EPA to validate the State compliance statistics and,
where necessary, provide recommendations and support for
corrective action.
The maintaining and updating of CDS is a major component
of the proper management of the stationary source
enforcement program. Each Region must update CDS in a
timely manner (at least quarterly) and ensure that
the data is complete and accurate as defined in
Headquarters guidance.
Emphasis in FY 1980/1981 is also placed on providing
support for continuing SIP revision work. Also, these
revisions will increase significantly the number of major
VOC sources that must meet SIP standards, and thus,
ensuring expeditious compliance by these sources is
imperative. Efforts in FY 1980 should also be devoted to
ensuring that new sources are constructed in accordance
with applicable NSPS, PSD and emissions offset provisions.
Regions should also assure compliance with standards for
hazardous pollutants under NESHAPS, and enforce all appli-
cable provisions of the Power Plant and Industrial Fuel
Use Act of 1978.
-------
- 91 -,
During FY 1980, the Regional Offices should complete
an evaluation/audit of all of their States' air
enforcement programs. The Regions should review the
SIP enforcement, enforcement aspects of NSR/PSD permitting,
and NSPS and NESHAPS programs. Further, there must_be
a thorough review of the States' compliance monitoring
and surveillance program. When appropriate, the Regions
should provide recommendations and assistance to States
whose programs need improvement.
REGIONAL OFFICE PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Air Quality Management
Priority I
1 Percent of States having EPA approved SIP for the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration. — This PPA measures
the status of the development by the States and approval by
EPA of State plans for the revention of significant Deter-
ioration as required by Part C of Title i of the Clean Air Act.
2. Percent of States having full legislative authority
approved by EPA for implementing automotive inspection/
maintenance program. — This PPA measures the status of the
enactment by States and approval by EPA of the legislative
authority necessary to implement mandatory inspection/main-
tenance programs in required urban nonattainment areas for
ozone and/or carbon monoxide.
3. Percent of required inspection/maintenance programs
proceeding to develop on schedule. — This PPA measures the
status of"state progress in carrying out the schedule con-
tained in the 1979 attainment SIP for the development of
mandatory automotive inspection/maintenance programs.
4. Percent of conditionally approved SIPs corrected by the
State on schedule (by pollutant). — This PPA measures the
status of State efforts to correct, modify, or add provi-
sions to their 1979 attainment SIP as a result of condi-
tional approval of the original submission. Actions by the
State are to be in accordance with the schedule set forth by
EPA in the conditional approval. Only one SIP per pollutant
per State should be counted in the PPA. If any part of an
attainment SIP for one of the criteria pollutants has been
conditionally approved by EPA, the entire state SIP for that
pollutant is considered to be conditionally approved for the
purpose of this PPA. (i.e./ SIP for 0- where one VOC regu-
lation has been conditionally approved).
5. Number of 0 /CO SIP Strategies Tracked and Reviewed as a
ratio of the to?al number 0 /CO strategies. — This PPA
covers the Regional tracking, review (including RFP) and
approval/disapproval of C) /CO SIPs. Regions should count as
a strategy each separate T/M program, TCM program, and set
of VOC regulations tracked and reviewed as a ratio of the
total number of such strategies.
-------
- 92 -
6. Number of TSP nontraditional SIP strategies tracked and
reviewed as a ratio of the total number of TSP nontraditional
strategies. -- The regions should count as a strategy each
separate TSP nonattainment area which will have an approved
SIP calling for nontraditional controls (i.e., fugitive dust
control studies and/or measures) as a ratio of the total num-
ber of such strategies.
7. Number of TCM programs in areas >1 million. -- This PPA
covers the guidance and assistance to TCM programs in urban
areas >1 million. The Regions should count the number of
such areas assisted as a ratio of the total number of such
areas.
8. Number of State PSD programs as a ratio of the number of
States. -- The Regions should count the number of approved
State PSD plans and the number of full delegations of the PSD
program.
9. Number of Tier II reviews completed by a Region as a
ratio of the total number of Tier II sources. — The Regions
should count the number of Tier II reviews (i.e. BACT deter-
mination and air quality impact analysis) which they or their
contractor will conduct as a ratio of the total number of all
Tier II reviews (i.e., including State completed Tier II
reviews).
Priority II
10. Number of I/M programs guided and assisted as a ratio of
the number of I/M programs. — This PPA covers the guidance
and assistance to I/M programs or areas starting a SIP
required I/M program as a ratio of the total number of such
programs.
11. Number of VOC regulatory programs guided and assisted as
a ratio of the number of VOC regulatory programs. — The
Regions should count the number of programs assisted a,s a
ratio of the total number of State and local regulatory pro-
grams (agencies) which are developing VOC regulations,
12. Number of TSP nontraditional SIP strategies in areas
>200K population guided and assisted as a ratio of the total
number of such strategies. — The Regions should count the
number of areas >200K population requiring nontraditional
TSP controls where guidance is provided as a ratio of the total
number of such areas.
13. Number of Pb SIP strategies tracked and reviewed as a
ratio of the total number of such strategies. — The Regions
should count the number of Pb SIP strategies which are
-------
- 93 -
reviewed and approved/disapproved as a ratio of the total
number of such strategies required. A Pb SIP strategy is
considered to be each area or source(s) which require a sep-
arate control strategy demonstration.
14. Number of point source Pb SIP strategies guided and
assisted as a ratio of the total number of such strategies. —
The Regions should count the number of point source Pb con-
trol strategy demonstrations where assistance and guidance
are given as a ratio of the totaL number of such control stra-
tegies. The definition of a Pb point source is contained in
40 CFR 51.
15. Number of "other" Clean Air Act required SIP revisions
tracked and reviewed as a ratio of the total number of such
revisions. -- The Regions should count the number of Clean
Air Act required SIP revisions reviewed and approved/dis-
approved as a ratio of the total required. "Other" Clean Air
Act required SIP revisions are defined as those revisions,
required by the Act, but not covered by the general headings
of nonattainment SIPs or PSD (e.g., Stack Height, Board
composition, permit fees, etc.)
16. Number of State initiated SIP revisions tracked and
reviewed as a ratio of the total number of such revisions. —
The Regions should count the number of revisions initiated by
the States but not required by the Act which are reviewed and
approved/disapproved as a ratio of the total number submitted
to the Regions.
Priority III
17. Number of TCM programs in area >1 million population guided
and assisted as a ratio of the total number of such programs. —
Same as #7, but applied to areas >1 million.
18. Number of TSP nontraditional SIP strategies in areas
>200K guided and assisted as a ratio of the total number of
such strategies. — Same as #12, but applied to areas >200K.
19. Number of Tier I reviews completed by a Region as a
ratio of the total number of Tier I sources. — Same as # ,
but applied to Tier I reviews (i.e., engineering review on
sources >50 TPY SI? allowable).
20. Number of nonattainment SIP promulgations as a ratio of
the total number needed. — The Regions should count the num-
ber of promulgations made to help complete a disapproved
nonattainment SIP as a ratio of the total number needed to
lift sanctions.
-------
- 94 -
21. Number of urban (>500K population) Pb SIPs guided and
assisted as a ratio of the total number of such SIPs. — The
Regions should count the number of Pb SIPs in areas >500K
which are given assistance as a ratio of the total number of
such SIPs required. Any SIPs in urban areas >500K which
involve only the control of a few point sources should be
accounted for under #14 above and not here.
22. Number of Class I area visibility plans guided and
assist as a ratio of the total number of such plans (i.e.,
the total number of designated Class I areas or State por-
tions thereof). — The Regions should count the number of
visibility plans for designated Class I areas which they
guide and assist as a ratio of the total number of such
plans (i.e., the total number of designated Class I areas
or State portions thereof).
23. Number of PSD Set II SIPs guided and eissisted as a ratio
of the number of States. — The Regions should count the num-
ber of PSD SIPs for CO, 03/ and NO which they guide and
assist as a ratio of the number ofxStates.
24. Number of 111 (d) plans tracked and reviewed as a ratio
of the number of such plans needed. — The Regions should
count the number of pollutant/source specific lll(d) plans
which they review and approve/disapprove as a ratio of the
total number of pollutant/source plans needed.
Air Quality Monitoring
PRIORITY I
1. Percent of National Air Monitoring Stations (NAMS)
meeting all requirements of the EPA ambient monitoring regu-
lations, (location, probe siting, quality assurance). --
This PPA measures the status of State efforts to establish
national air monitoring sites as part of their state ambient.
monitoring network. The national air monitoring stations
are to be fully in place and operation by January 1, 1981.
-------
- 95 -
2. Number of NAMS monitors evaluated and fully documented
for conformance to 40 CFR 58 expressed as a ratio to the total
number of NAMS monitors. — Every NAMS pollutant monitor site
(NAMS being a subset of the SLAMS) must be evaluated for con-
formance to Appendices C, D, and E requirements of 40 CFR 58.
This involves visiting each site in the NAMS network over the
next year to verify whether requirements have been met. The
documentation consists of a detailed site description form
being' completed and schedules established for complying with
any 40 CFR 58 criteria not being met at the time of the pollu-
tant monitor evaluation. The site documentation also includes
the collection and submission of management information to
OAQPS. This management information consists primarily of
site descriptive data as well as information on schedules for
implementing the provisions of the 40 CFR 58 requirements.
All NAMS monitors should be evaluated by the end of FY-80.
3. Number of State and local agency 105 grants reviewed,
expressed as a ratio to the total number of agencies receiv-
ing grants. -- The Regions should include the number of 105
Agency Grants that have been reviewed for monitoring as a
ratio to total number of agencies receiving 105 grant monies.
4. Number of State or local agency system audits completed,
expressed as a ratio to the total number of State and local
agencies with air monitoring systems receiving 105 grant
monies. — This is a Regional responsibility involving an
annual on-site qualitative review of State or local agencies'
monitoring capabilities and facilities as required by 40 CFR
58, Appendix A, Section 2.4. The Region should account
only for those system audits involving 105 funded agencies.
5. Number of State monitoring (SLAMS) network descriptions
submitted to the Regional Office by January 1, 1980. — The
States are required to have a complete description of their
SLAMS (including NAMS) network available at the time the SIP
is revised to reflect the new 40 CFP 58 requirements. The
network description requirements are listed in 40 CFR 58.20.
6. Number of State quality assurance programs that are
reviewed and approved by the Region. — The Region should
include the number of State quality assurance programs (re-
quired and described in Appendix A of 40 CFR 58) which are
reviewed and approved by the Region. As a minimum, the State
quality assurance program description should cover the NAMS
network. It is recommended that the entire SLAMS network be
included in the quality assurance program in FY-80. The
quality assurance program should be submitted by the State
by 6/30/80 and approved by the Regional Office no later than
the end of FY-SO.
-------
- 96 -
7. Number of EMSL performance audits in which the regional
laboratory participates, expressed as a ratio of the total
number of audits EMSL schedules. — These audits are required
by 40 CFR 58 for all agencies operating SLAMS. For FY-1980,
those Regional Offices actually involved in ambient sampling
and analysis will be strongly encouraged to participate.
EMSL schedules a total of 13 performance audits annually
(S02, NCU, CO, nitrate, sulfate, and lead are semi-annual and
Hi-vol flow annual).
8. Number of SIP revisions for ambient monitoring reviewed,
expressed as a ratio to the total number of SIP's to be
revised. -- The States are required to submit a SIP revision
to 40 CFR 51.17 to reflect the 40 CFR 58 requirements by
January 1, 1980. The Regions should count the number of SIP
revisions to be made as a ratio to the number of SIP's needed
to be revised.
9. Number of special ozone studies in which the Region will
participate for areas which will need an extension for attain-
ment to 1987 and for which complex photochemical dispersion
models will be exercised. — The Region should include only
those studies which will involve the application of urban or
regional diffusion models. Generally, areas whose O3 design
value is less than 0.2 ppm and whose urbanized area - popula-
tion is less than 1.5 million will not be encouraged to
exercise complex photochemical models.
10. Number of States for which Region will process and vali-
date SLAMS data. -- The Regions should count those States for
which they will process and validate SLAMS data. The 40 CFR
58 regulations will change the requirement from all data being
reported quarterly to EPA to NAMS data being reported quarter-
ly to EPA. These new requirements will take effect with data
collected beginning in FY 1981. Therefore, in FY-80, all
SLAMS data should be reported and validated quarterly as is
current practice.
11. Number of data quality assessments completed for State
and local agency air quality data bases, expressed as a ratio
to the total number of data bases which need to be assessed.
-- The Region should display the number of State and local
agency data bases which will be assessed as a ratio to the
total number of State and local agencies operating a SLAMS
network. This activity involves the implementation of the
recommendations of the Quality Assurance Committee in terms
of assessing the quality of data in EPA data banks. This is
primarily the summarization of a series of qualitative judg-
ments on data quality. These assessment activities should be
considered interim measures until the precision and accuracy
reporting requirements in 40 CFR 58 Appendix A take effect.
-------
- 97 -
12. Number of Regional Environmental Profiles completed
which involve air quality displays or analyses. — The Regions
should count the number of urbanized areas greater than
200,000 population which will be part of the Regional
Environmental Profile.
13. Number of emergency spills or emergency episodes to
which the Region responds. — The Region should count only
those spills or episodes during which the Region takes envi-
ronmental samples or for which Regional personnel are involved
on-site.
PRIORITY II
14. Number of New Source Review Data Analyses performed by
the Region. — The Region should count the number of new
source permits for which they review the air quality data.
15a. Number of source operated monitoring networks reviewed
in States where the Region is implementing the PSD program
expressed as a ratio to the total number which need to be
reviewed. — The Region should include the number of source
networks that the Region reviews in States that do not have
a PSD program. Review means discussions with the proposed
source on the monitoring plan described in "Ambient Monitor-
ing Guidelines for PSD" - OAQPS 1.2-096. In the case of
large/controversial sources, and-on-site visits to monitoring
sites, performance audits would be included in the review.
15b. Number of source operated monitoring networks reviewed
in States with PSD programs. — The Regions should include the
number of source networks that they review in States with a
PSD program. (i.e., in States with permit granting authority
either by means of a SIP or EPA delegation)^
16. Number of States for which the Region will process
emission data. — This covers those States for which the
Region will process and submit emission data to NADB for
inclusion in NEDS.
17. Number of pollutant monitor performance audits completed.
— The Region should count the number of quantitative on-site
performance audits of individual pollutant monitors that the
Region conducts. (Reported by pollutant).
-------
- 98 -
18. Number of urbanized areas for which the Region will coor-
dinate the reporting of a daily air quality index expressed
as a ratio to the total number of urbanized areas needing
coordination. — The Region should include the number of urban-
ized areas greater than 500,000 population which will require
Pegional coordination and overview to implement an air quality
index report expressed as a ratio to the total number of
urbanized areas greater than 500,000. For areas already
reporting an index, coordination would involve review of the
existing index report for consistency with 40 CFR 58, Appendix
G.
19. Number of SLAMS monitor sites (excluding NAMS) evaluated
and documented for conformance to 40 CFR 58 expressed as a
ratio to the total number of SLAMS monitor sites. — The total
number of SLAMS pollutant monitor sites that the Regional
Office will evaluate and provide detailed site documentation
should be displayed as a ratio to the total number of pollu-
tant monitors in the SLAMS network.
PRIORITY III
20. Number of urban lead monitoring networks reviewed,
expressed as a ratio to the total number of networks which
need review. — The number of urban lead networks that the
Region reviews for areas greater than 500,000 population
should be displayed as a ratio to the total number of urban
areas greater than 500,000 population. In addition, the
Regions should include any other areas for which the State
will be required to operate a lead network.
21. Number of population exposure analyses the Region con-
ducts expressed as a ratio to the total number of analyses
needing to be performed. — The Region should count urban-
ized areas greater than 200,000 population for which they
will perform population exposure analyses expressed as a
ratio to the total number of urbanized areas greater than
200,000 population.
-------
- 99 -
AIR ENFORCEMENT
I. Ensure Compliance by Major SIP Sources
Number of major SIP sources determined to be
in compliance with emission limitations
Number of major SIP sources determined to be
in violation of emission limitations, but
meeting compliance schedules.
Number of major SIP sources determined to be
in violation of emission limitations and not
meeting or not on compliance schedules.
Number of major SIP sources of unknown status
with either emission limitations or schedules.
- Number of overview inspections for existing
major SIP sources. -
Number of existing major SIP source^case
development inspections completed. —'
Number of civil/criminal actions against . /
major existing sources in violation of SIPs. —
Number of Section 113 administrative orders
against major existing sources in violation of
SIPs.
Number of notices of noncompliance iss :ed
(for all major sources).
Number of noncompliance penalty assessments
(for all major sources).
Total dollar amount of noncompliance penalties
assessed (for all major sources),
-------
- 100 -
II. Ensure Adequate New Source Program
- Number of identified sources subject to
NSPS and determined to be in compliance.
- Number of subject sources determined to be
in violation with respect to any procedural
and/or emission requirements for NSPS.
Number of subject sources of unknown
compliance status with respect to any
procedural and/or emission requirements
for NSPS.
Number of PSD sources in compliance with
procedural permit requirements.
- Number of PSD sources determined to be in
violation with respect to procedural or
permit requirements.
Number of PSD sources of unknown compliance
status with respect to procedural or
permit requirements.
Number of new source (subject to NSR, NSPS,
and PSD) case development inspections.—/
Number of State NSR permits reviewed for
enforceability.
Number of State NSR permits found to be
deficient.
Number of audits of State NSR programs (can
be part of the general State audit or a
separate audit).
-------
- 101 -
Number of Regional Offices issued permits
for:
(a) NSR
(b) PSD
(c) NESHAPS
Number of NSPS performance tests observed.
Number of civil/criminal actions against
new sources in violation of NSR, NSPS,
and PSD requirements.!/
III. NESHAPS Program-/
o Number of non-transitory sources subject
to NESHAPS regulations that are in
compliance.
o Number of non-transitory NESHAP sources
determined to be in violation of standards
or waivers.
o Number of non-transitory sources subject
to NESHAP regulations of unknown com-
pliance status with respect to standards
or waivers.
o Number of non-transitory sources that are
on waivers and are in compliance with
their waivers.
2/
o Number of NESHAPS overview inspections.—
o Number of NESHAPS case development
inspections.I/
o Number of civil/criminal actions against
NESHAP sources.!/
-------
- 102 -
<
IV. Create and Maintain Priority Source
File in the Compliance Data System
- Number of States for which an adequate
priority source file is maintained in
CDS.
V. Energy Related Activities--^
- Number of 113(d)(5) orders issued.
VI. llKd)-/
1 •
Number of sources subject to lll(d)
requirements.
-------
- 103 -
Footnotes
3,/Quarterly updates of compliance status reported
~ through CDS.
2/Facility Overview Inspection - means verification
of State reported compliance status for all
emission points within a facility for all
regulated pollutants and determination of com-
pliance by the facility with all enforceable
procedural requirements. Individual field
surveillance actions comprising a facility
inspection must be completed for each major source
within the fiscal year.
3/Case Development Inspections - distinguished
from facility overview inspections and counted
separately. Inspections of a given facility
subsequent to an overview inspection may be
counted. Case development inspections support
specific enforcement actions originated by
regional overview, citizen complaints, etc.
4/A civil/criminal action can be counted once a
complete litigation report has been submitted
to Headquarters.
-------
1980/1981 WATER QUALITY MEDIA GUIDANCE
-------
WATER QUALITY
MEDIA OVERVIEW
Major Objectives
During 1980/81 the Water Quality Program will aggressively
pursue the following three central objectives which are
encompassed in this Guidance:
o To aggressively control pollution discharges in
order to protect public health and sensitive
ecological systems such as wetlands;
o To share responsibilities with States and localities
while encouraging public participation in water
quality management; and
o To manage the program in an efficient manner.
Clearly, the driving force in the Water Quality Program is
to control pollution, to protect public heatlh and the
environment. As our knowledge has increased regarding the
effects of toxic pollutants on human life, so too have we
intensified our efforts on controlling toxic pollutants
from entering the environment. Similarly, the significant
improvements in our understanding of aquatic resources,
especially wetlands and shallow water areas, is paralleled
by increased legislative attention to protect these
resources through Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
It is essential that responsibilities are shared between
Federal and non-federal authorities to maximize our efforts
on improving water quality, to limit redundancies in
Federal and non-federal programs, and to utilize the best
mix of resources to identify and solve our environmental
problems. Because of the critical nature of the Water
Quality Program and the large number of dollars the program
utilizes, it is essential that the program be managed
efficiently to maximize environmental benefits. This can
be achieved through an integrated planning and implementation
process within the Agency as well as integration with other
Federal agencies and States and localities.
Major Planning Assumptions
Inherent in the priority activities for FY 80/81 for
achieving media objectives are the following major planning
assumptions:
-------
- 108 -
Construction Grants
o The Construction Grants appropriation will be f
$3.8 billion in FY 1980 (available by October 1,
1979), and $4 billion is requested in FY 1981,
with the allotment formula for both years the
same as in FY 1979.
o The Congress will enact a one-year extension of the
allotment period for FY 1979-1982 Construction
Grants funds, increasing the period of availability
to three years for all appropriations authorized
in the Clean Water Act.
Spill Prevention
The Spill Prevention and Response Program, while
continuing in the general program direction established
during the last two years, is experiencing some major
changes in emphasis to allow response to hazardous
spills. The principal assumptions for program
planning in FY 1980 are:
o Publication of final Hazardous Substances Reg-
ulations, revised to incorporate the October 1978
amendments to Section 311 of the Clean Water Act,
is expected in the Spring of 1979.
o The list of 299 hazardous substances which must be
reported in the event of a spill and which will
require EPA spill emergency response will be
expanded by 1981.
o Based on voluntary reports, the program estimates
about 700-1,200 hazardous spills, involving one or
more of the 299 substances, will occur annually.
Ocean Disposal
o All interim Ocean Disposal Permits are to be
phased out by the end of 1981, by regulation.
All dumping of harmful sewage sludge is to stop
by the end of 1981, by statute. *
Dredge and Fill
o Transfer of Section 404 Dredge and Fill Program a
responsibility to qualified States will begin in
FY 80 and increase in FY 81. Approvals will remain
low until later years (reflecting both a waiting
-------
- 109 -
period while EPA finalizes regulations and the
lead time for States to develop their programs),
but EPA will be heavily involved in assisting
interested States in program development.
o The total Dredge and Fill permit load will
increase gradually from the current level as
EPA enforcement activities increase. This change
results from better surveillance methods and more
citizen participation and increasing attention to
the total acreage and stream mileage being actually
regulated.
Water Quality Management
o Funding of continuing planning will be limited to
those areas in which substantial implementation of
the initial approved plan is taking place.
o Funds will be available for continuing planning
under Section 208 in FY 81 with emphasis on com-
pletion of planning in high priority problem areas.
Permits Issuance
The FY 80/31 Guidance is premised on three major
assumptions:
o FY 80/81 priorities will be essentially the same
as in FY 79, that is emphasis is placed on issuing
and reissuing permits to control major sources
of industrial and municipal pollution, including
Federal facilities.
o Additional priorities which must be addressed
within the context of decreasing resources are
implementation of the permits consolidation
effort and implementation of the National Pre-
treatment Program.
o Clean Water Act amendments require consideration
of new variances such as the Section 301 (i)
municipal time extension, the Section 301(g)
water quality variance, and the Section 301(h)
marine waiver.
Media Priorities
Program plans in FY 80/81 will emphasize activities that
are designed to better assess environmental problems, and
to develop and implement programs to solve and prevent
environmental hazards.
-------
- 110 -
Essential to an efficient pollution control program is
the ability:
o To identify potentially harmful pollutants;
o To assess the effects of levels of pollutants on
aquatic organisms, other food chain organisms,
and man,
o To assess the transport and fate of pollutants
in the environment,
o To monitor for potential pollution problems, and
o To evaluate improvements in water quality.
Much is known about conventional pollutant indicators such
as biological oxygen demand and bacterial counts. However,
our ability to assess toxic pollution problems is hampered
by the large number of toxic pollutants in the environment
and the necessity of using highly sophisticated and
expensive technology to monitor pollutant levels. Currently
there is much ongoing work to resolve these problems.
Program plans demonstrate an integrated effort by the Office
of Research and Development and the Office of Water and
Waste Management to improve problem assessment capabilities.
Concurrent with our activities designed to identify and
assess environmental problems, the Water Quality Program
is aggressively pursuing activities to solve our water
quality problems while limiting environmental impacts to
other media. Major Water Quality Program thrusts for
1980/81 are in response to the mandate of the Clean Water
Act of 1977.
Program plans represent a coordinated effort by the Office
of Water Program Operations, Office of Water Planning and
Standards and Office of Enforcement, working in. concert
with States and localities to:
o Control industrial and municipal dischargers of
pollutants through technology-based controls.
o Control nonpoint source pollution and prevent
and clean up oil and hazardous spills.
o Protect sensitive ecological systems such as
lakes and wetlands.
-------
- Ill -
o Utilize Water Quality Standards and environmental
quality based effluent controls, where necessary,
to assure protection of public health and
environment.
o Enforce environmental control requirements.
The implementation of these priorities will be characterized
by their integration within the Water Quality Program and
integration with other Agency activities directed at
improving environmental quality. Information gleaned
from problem assessment activities will be critical to
the continuing evolution of solutions and strategies.
Industrial and Municipal Dischargers
In 1980 and 1981 the control of industrial and
municipal dischargers of pollutants will remain the
keystone to water programs control activities. The
1980 program will also include additional pollutant
studies (e.g., "hot spots" analyses) that will con-
centrate on selected areas of industry where monitoring
data indicate high cancer incidence or potential water
pollution problems would persist after the imple-
mentation of effluent limitations. The studies will
lead to the development and implementation of additional
controls. Efforts also will continue in 1980 to
identify other toxic pollutants and industries that
should be addressed in effluent guidelines.
By 1984, industrial sources of toxic pollutants will
be required to meet technology-based toxic effluent
discharge limitations for both direct and indirect
wastewater discharges. This effort entails detailing
the presence or absence of 65 toxic pollutants or
classes of toxic pollutants. An in-depth economic
analysis of each industry also must be conducted
to ensure that regulations are economically achievable
and equitable. This program will peak in 1979 and
1980 arid continue through 1981 with final promulgations
and court defenses.
Municipal point source control activities are addressed
principally through the Waste Treatment Facility
Construction Program. This program is of major
importance to reduce water pollution problems resulting
from conventional pollutants, such as suspended
solids, bacteria, and oxygen demanding loads that
degrade our waters and continue to pose problems to
public health and the environment. The long range
goal of the Construction Grants Program is to eliminate
-------
- 112 -
the municipal discharge of untreated or inadequately
treated pollutants and thereby help restore or
maintain the quality of the Nation's waters. A
large number of amendments to Title II of the
Clean Water Act created incentives for use of
environmentally justifiable, innovative and
alternative technologies in municipal treatment
systems; established funding for States to assist
them in adopting and managing Construction Grants
Programs; made special considerations for the needs
of small communities; and increased emphasis on water
reuse and recycling, recovery of energy, and confined
disposal of pollutant wastes to prevent their migration
to the water.
Through the passage of the Clean Water Act the Congress
reaffirmed its intention that States have a major and
continuing role in environmental programs. The year
1980 will mark the start of a new era in planning,
implementing and managing environmental programs at
the Regional and State levels. State/EPA Agreements
will present consolidated approaches to solving
water supply, solid waste, and water pollution control
problems. The integration of these program areas
will be a major step toward the objective of compre-
hensive environmental planning and management.
Activities aimed at integrated management are being
initiated in 1979. EPA is requiring all States to
develop comprehensive State/EPA Agreements to cover
Clean Water Act programs including consolidation of
Sections 106, 208, 303, and the Clean Lakes provisions
of Section 314.
State/EPA Agreements will be the result of a negotiation
process between each State and its respective EPA
Region. The Agreements will describe activities that
States and EPA will undertake during the coming year.
An agreement will be the result of an assessment of
the environmental problems faced by an individual
State, development of a long-term strategy to solve
those problems, and a determination of critical steps
to take during the next year.
Each State/EPA Agreement will reflect important decisions
on environmental and programmatic problems, State and
EPA priorities, timing, and responsibilities. It
also will be a management tool which focuses attention
on the evaluation and accomplishment of major
environmental efforts.
-------
- 113 -
Initial Water Quality Management Planning will be
completed by all States and areawide agencies by
the end of 1979. The continuing planning effort by
local and State agencies in 1980 will focus on the
highest priority problem areas with special emphasis
on toxics. The Agency will stress implementation
of the initial plans and require that substantial
implementation occur as a condition for future
funding.
The key change in program management to ensure Section
208 plans are being carried out is the development
of the State/EPA Agreement process. State imple-
mentation will utilize funds provided under Section 106
Program Grants to accelerate establishment of regulatory
programs and to provide for monitoring to assess the
adequacy of clean-up efforts.
Implementation of the Construction Grants Program
requires integrated Agency and State efforts with a
large delegation of responsibilities to the States.
The program strategy for 1930 recognizes that there are
limited funds available to meet these pollution control
needs and that the funds available must go toward
assisting municipalities in meeting the most critical
needs in the shortest possible time. Accordingly,
the EPA strategy for 1930-1931 is: (a) to orient
funding toward meeting the environmental requirements
of the Act through stringent cost-effect review on
a project-by-project basis, and (b) to stress
innovative and alternative approaches to waste
treatment, including emphasis on water and energy
conservation, waste water reuse and recycling of
pollutants, and small systems. Funds specifically
earmarked for State delegation under Section 205(g)
of the Act will be directed toward maximizing
State assumption of program activities in the shortest
possible time. In all cases, State delegation will
be part of an overall agreement that will ensure that
EPA policies and environmental objectives continue to
be met.
EPA will continue to pursue program strategies that
provide sufficient certainty and stability to States
and municipalities to facilitate effective planning
and management at all levels. The 1980 appropriation
request of $3.8 billion is a critical component of
this management need.
-------
- 114 -
The State Management Assistance Grant Program *
authorizes the use of two percent or $400,000,
whichever is greater, of each allotment to cover
the cost of delegation to the States of the
Construction Grants Program and (to the extent that
funds suffice) the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System Permit, Dredge arid Fill, and
Section 208 Management Programs. EPA's long-term
goal is to allow the States, rather than EPA, to
assume responsibility for day-to-day management of
Construction Grants activities. The timing and
extent of delegation to each State depends on the
State's ability to operate a program that meets the
necessary competency requirements and policy direction
mandated by the law and EPA objectives. A grant is
given to a State when it can show that it is able to
assume delegated responsibility for a substantial
portion of Construction Grants program activities.
Approximately 26 States are expected to receive
State Management Assistance Grants during 1979,
which will allow gradual phase-in of most program
activities as the States staff up and are trained
to accept each task. Most of the remaining interested
States will have entered into preliminary negotiations
during 1979 leading to a grant in 1980 and 1981.
Resource benefits from this State delegation strategy
should begin to be evident in 1981.
Control of Nonpoint Sources
Nonpoint source pollutants are a continuing cause of
water quality degradation. A substantial number of
the nation's waterways will continue to fail to meet
their intended uses unless nonpoint source programs
are developed and controls enacted. Nonpoint
source problems require further identification;
control techniques must be developed and tested;
and cost effective, best management practice
systems designed and demonstrated. Substantial
efforts will be directed to the identification and
evaluation of these practices both with Agency resources
and in conjunction with other Federal agencies.
It is a priority to continue to develop and assess
methods of controlling urban nonpoint source
pollution and additional methods for controlling
rural nonpoint source pollution.
-------
- 115 -
Hazardous Spills
In 1980, the Agency will implement and expand its
Spill Prevention and Response Program to cover not
only oil spills but also the discharge of those
substances determined to be hazardous by EPA. The
Agency is currently developing and will promulgate
regulations for hazardous substances designations,
removability, harmful quantities, and rates of
penalty. An Environmental Emergency Response Team
has been established to provide immediate on-the-
scene expertise in handling, clean up, and disposal
of most critical oil and hazardous substance spills.
Protection of Ecological Systems
Wetlands
In FY 80 and especially FY 81 the Wetlands Protection
Program will have a high priority within the Office
of Water and Waste Management. Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act provides the principal protective tool
and may underpin other non-Federal activities for
protection of wetlands. EPA shares the responsibility
for implementing Section 404 with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, and in the future, with the States.
A significant increase in Section 404 responsibility
for EPA will occur in 1980 as the Agency provides
a significant degree of the substantive review on
at least the most significant environmental permits,
whether issued by the Corps or the States, and
responds to the variety of new program developments.
Under the 1977 Act, the Corps will continue to allow
dredge and fill material discharge in the traditionally
navigable waters. States may assume permit respons-
ibility in other waters, if they are qualified. EPA's
role in this process is large and includes respons-
ibility for issuing regulations, establishing State
program approval criteria, reviewing and acting upon
applications from States, and providing continuing
oversight for both States and the Corps permit programs.
EPA is currently drafting two sets of regulations
for State assumption of permitting responsibilities.
The regulations are for program approval and State
program operations.
-------
- 116 -
Lake Protection
The Clean Lakes Program is authorized by Section 314
of the Clean Water Act. The program provides grants
to States for: identification and classification
according to euthrophic condition of all property
around freshwater lakes; procedures, processes, and
methods to control sources of pollution; and pro-
cedures for restoration.
Program plans demonstrate continual efforts directed
at efficient control of lake pollution problems and
activities designed for lake quality enhancement.
Water Quality Standards and Environmental Quality
Based Effluent Controls
Water quality standards are a means for States to
protect the ambient quality of their waters. Section
303 of the Clean Water Act requires States to review
Water Quality Standards every three years and to
submit new and revised standards to the Administrator
for approval. If standards are unacceptable to the
Administrator, the EPA can promulgate State standards
where States fail to comply with Federal regulation.
At present, many State standards do not contain
criteria for toxic substances. Even where States do
have certain criteria for toxics, NPDES permits
frequently are not written to meet such criteria.
In FY 80/81 EPA is considering revising the Federal
standards regulations so that States may be required
to adopt numerical criteria for a minimum list of
toxic substances. The Office of Water Planning and
Standards is further attempting to remedy this
through technical assistance on wasteload allocation
procedures and methods of implementing bioassay
criteria in Water Quality Standards. An additional
priority here is to develop a strategy for the use
of Section 307 (a) toxic effluent limits where BAT
requirements are sufficient to protect public health
and environment.
Enforcement
Enforcement activities play a central role in implementing
an effective pollution control program. Toxic pollutant
and hazardous materials enforcement wll be pursued through
enforcing reissued permits, bioassay inspections, pre-
treatment requirements, Section 404 requirements, Section 311
-------
- 117 -
hazardous substances requirements, and use of Section 504
emergency powers. In 1980, the Permit Program will initiate
its issuance of permits based on promulgated effluent
guidelines for toxic pollutants.
Implementation of the pretreatment requirements demon-
strates the importance of working liaison between the EPA
and localities. The Clean Water Act of 1979 requires that
POTW's must develop programs to enforce the EPA's National
Pretreatment Requirements. Following the 1978 promulgation
of Federal pretreatment guidelines, the program will begin
to shift in 1979 and 1980 to the local level. Toxic
pollutant controls will proceed through incorporating
pretreatment requirements in municipal permits for control
of indirect discharges. Enforcement resources will be
devoted to the pretreatment programs, consider requests
for modification of pretreatment standards, and modify
municipal permits to incorporate pretreatment requirements.
The Water Quality Program will make a major initiative
to limit the redundancies of the regulatory process and
to provide for more efficient program management. In
1980 the Permit Program will work to consolidate National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits
under the Clean Water Act with Hazardous Waste permits
under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and
Underground Injection Control permits under the Safe
Drinking Water Act. Consolidation of these permit programs
will eliminate duplicative permit issuance reporting
requirements for affected facilities.
Emphasis will continue in 1979 and 1980 on the Municipal
Enforcement Strategy first formulated in 1978. As with
other water quality programs, this strategy is an attempt
to integrate program activities of the Grants, Enforcement,
and NPDES Permit Compliance Programs, to better coordinate
and reinforce planning and scheduling of municipalities to
meet the goals of the Act. The principal effort in 1979
and 1980 will be to implement a program of action through-
out EPA and the States, leading to:
o Integrated municipal permit and grants schedules;
o Compatible information systems;
o Internally consistent operating procedures; and
o Coordinated grant and enforcement sanctions for
noncomplying municipalities.
-------
- 118 -
The overall result is expected to be more effective and
expeditious actions toward the compliance of municipalities
with requirements established in the Act.
Permits Issuance
The major objectives of the FY 1980/81 Permits Program
will be to maximize the control of toxic pollutants
through the initiation of the second round permitting
effort and the implementation of the National Pretreatment
Program; to accomplish a major regulatory and management
reform initiative by streamlining the permit process to
allow for consolidated procedures, organization and permit
format; and contribution to the major source enforcement
effort through implementation of the National Enforcement
Strategy.
Under separate cover, OWE will provide more detailed
guidance on integrating permit program priorities
with particular reference to pretreatment activities.
o Toxic control through second-round permits— NPDES
second-round permits under the Clean Water Act
will begin to be issued in FY 80 and will be issued
throughout FY 80/81. The reissuance of expiring
permits to these industries, including Federal
facilities, covered by the NRDC consent decree
("primary" industries) will be of particular
importance as it will impose BAT/toxic limitations
on the significant sources of toxic pollutants.
Emphasis on permits issuance will be prioritized
in FY 1980/81 as follows: major primary industries
which could be sources of highly toxic substances,
major secondary industries, remaining (80%) minor
primary industries, and minor secondary industries.
0 Regulatory and management reform through consolidated
permitting — EPA is consolidating its permit pro-
grams, both to simplify administrative steps and
to facilitate addressing all environmental concerns
through a single process. By October 1, 1979,
EPA will consolidate permit issuing, i.e., permit
drafting, paper flow and initial point of contact,
for NPDES permits; Hazardous Wastes permits;
Underground Injection Control permits; Ocean
Dumping permits; Air New Source permits; and other
permit-like programs in one place in each of its
Regional Offices. Regulated facilities will be
able to submit one application for all water, solid
and hazardous wastes related permits; go through
one review; and be issued one permit.
-------
- 119 -
o Toxic control through pretreatment — The pre-
treatment program is expected to take on increasing
importance in 1980. Pretreatment activities in
FY 1980 should be addressed generally according
to the following priorities: 1) provide assistance
to States in developing State pretreatment programs
and approve such programs: 2) review and make
determinations on requests for local pretreatment
program approval; 3) develop compliance schedules
for insertion in NPDES municipal permits requiring
the development of a local pretreatment program;
and 4) work with States and municipalities in
identifying industrial users subject to categorical
pretreatment standards as such standards are
promulgated.
o Major source enforcement through implementation of
the Municipal Strategy — The National Municipal
Policy and Strategy published in FY 1979 sets forth
priorities for reissuing expiring major municipal
permits. This policy directs that municipalities
requesting time extensions for compliance with
secondary treatment requirements (Section 301 (i)
extensions) be given priority in permit reissuance.
The 301 (i) compliance extension is a major
mechanism for bringing non-complying municipalities
into compliance with the lav; thus contributing
significantly to the Agency's major source enforce-
ment effort.
Research and Development
Much is known about conventional pollutant indicators such
as biological oxygen demand, and bacterial counts.
However, our ability to assess toxic pollution problems
is hampered by the large number of toxic pollutants in
the environment, and the necessity of using highly
sophisticated and expensive technology to monitor pollutant
levels. Currently there is much work ongoing to resolve
these problems. Priority activities (not necessarily in
priority order) in 1980/81 include an integrated effort
by the Office of Research and Development and the Office
of Water and Waste Management to:
o complete the publication of water quality criteria
for 65 classes of toxic pollutants, to assess
impacts of those pollutants on aquatic species
and human health, and to determine acceptable
levels,
-------
- 120 -
o select additional priority pollutants and develop
criteria,
o develop wet weather criteria for pollutants to
account for nonpoint source contributions during
high flows,
o add carcinogens and chronically toxic pollutants
to the hazardous substance list,
o develop recreational water quality criteria,
o expand selected water quality predictive models to
include toxics and sediments in assessing transport
and fate of pollutants,
o develop rapid screening tests for characterization.
of toxic pollutants in complex effluent,
o assess effects of specific pollutants, pollutant
transformation products and combinations of
pollutants on marine biota,
o develop simulation techniques, including microcosms,
to predict pollutant stress on marine biota and
ecosystems,
o develop a simple implementable technique for
assessing wetlands transition zones, and
characterization of productivity of wetlands, as
a tool for assessing the quality of wetlands,
o improve solid phase bioassay techniques to test
toxicity of dredged and fill material,
o develop broader spectrum and more cost-effective
methods for screening and quantifying organics in
water and wastewater with increased emphasis in
FY 81 on nonvolatile organics,
o develop more cost effective multi-element and
chemical specification methods, with emphasis
in FY 81 on solids,
o perform multi-media toxic and hazardous material
problem assessments in local areas in response to
public health concerns, in absence of State or
local capabilities,
o continue study of toxic materials in publicly
owned treatment works in order to develop compre-
hensive urban toxic pollutant control strategies,
-------
- 121 -
o continue development of methodologies to assess
impact of nonpoint source pollution, and perform
nonpoint source assessments,
o integrate Agency monitoring efforts for priority
pollutants, including establishing a single
data base system and approved quality assurance,
o develop, evaluate, and report on a practical lake
(quality) evaluation index (LEI) procedure to
assist lake managers in interpreting lake problems
and selecting corrective actions,
o assist Regions and States to develop toxic pollutant
monitoring capabilities to support State/EPA
Agreements, toxic wasteload allocations, water
quality standards, permit setting, and permit
compliance monitoring,
o continue exploratory research to identify potential
pollutant problems in the future and to develop
potential controls for pollution problems; to
develop technologies that minimize pollution
production.
o sludge: evaluate innovative and alternative
technology projects; improve data on exposures of
organics, metals, and pathogens from land appli-
cation; develop beneficial uses, including energy
recovery technologies, evaluate detoxification
methods,
o small flows/land treatment: demonstrate central
management of onsite systems; extend overland
flow systems to colder climates; evaluate toxics
management in land application systems; investigate
higher rate nutrient update systems,
o investigate process development for treatment
systems for small communities and combined sewer
overflow management and technology; evaluate
conservation/reuse demonstrations and high rate
biological removal of specific pollutants; and
develop surrogate control parameters,
o initiate a major program for development and
demonstration of reuse/recycle technologies and
to reduce intermedia impacts of wastewater
treatment.
-------
- 122 -
HEADQUARTERS PLANS
Construction Grants; Municipal Operations
Plans and Priorities, FY 80 and 81
The Construction Grants Program in FY 1980 and FY 1981
will put principal emphasis on program implementation
and management; few (if any) new legislative changes
are anticipated. Although the overall goal of the
program remains intact, the new thrusts arising from
the Clean Water Act of 1977 will significantly alter
EPA's management strategy. The highest management
priority effort in the near term is to shift the
program toward decentralized management, with State
delegation and use of Corps of Engineers resources
receiving maximum emphasis. Effective management in
this decentralized environment will require increased
use of the Regional Construction Grants Management
Information System (RCGMIS) at the EPA level and
development of improved, program management systems,
all with delegation.
The principal Headquarters emphasis in FY 1930 and
FY 1981 will be to implement on a national basis the
overall program management strategy. The emergence
of major Corps and State delegation of activities has
accentuated the need for support structures that will
both enhance the benefits of decentralized management
and facilitate control and coordination across the
various management levels. The highest Headquarters
priority will be to make the overall program management
strategy work; the principal methods will be through
policy and guidance, technical assistance to States
and use by the Regions and States. For the first
time, the Construction Grants Program Guidance includes
municipal operations and maintenance activities. The
major activities related directly to Construction
Grants policy are:
o Establish policy and implement guidance in
support of the program shift into decentralized
management, including delegation to States
and the Corps, and definition of the EPA role
and responsibilities in a decentralized situation.
-------
- 123 -
o Provide guidance on and evaluate (on a national
basis) the five-year State priority list,
including guidance on priority systems, long-
term planning and uses, and management of the
priority list.
o Coordinate with the Enforcement Division in
the management of the National effort under
Section 301 (h), to review and take action on
applications from municipalities regarding permit
modification requests for ocean dischargers.
o Provide guidance on and evaluate (on a nation-
wide basis) the Step 1 facility planning stage,
including implementation of new amendments
regarding innovative and alternative (I&A)
technology, small systems, cost-effectiveness,
changed eligibilities, multi-purpose projects, etc.
o Provide innovative and alternative technology
assistance and support thru Cincinnati and Ada
offices.
o Review and coordinate the Advanced Waste Treat-
ment (AWT) and Advanced Secondary Treatment (AST)
decisions in accordance with PRM #79-7, for
direct review by the Administrator. The develop-
ment of Guidance for and review of AWT and AST
Regional level decisions.
o Coordinate (on a nationwide basis) the manage-
ment of construction outlays and the meeting
of national estimates.
o Coordinate and evaluate Regional Office and
State implementation of program guidance
(being developed by MOB) on operational
requirements.
o Coordinate national public participation
policy in the Grants programs.
o Coordinate national Minority Business Enterprise
(MBE) policy in conjunction with the Office of
Civil Rights for the Grants program.
o Continue support to implementation of the
President's Urban Initiative to discourage
sprawl.
-------
- 124 -
o Develop guidance on multiple purpose pro-
jects and funding strategies.
o Direct, in conjunction with the Enforcement
Division, the National Municipal Strategy.
o Provide close support and technical assistance
to the Regions in problems related to design
and construction of treatment facilities.
o Coordinate a comprehensive program management
strategy which encompasses the management of
priority lists, applications, awards, precon-
struction lags, completions, outlays, etc.
o Promote (encourage) rural development
iniatives, including use of alternative systems.
o Prepare a long-term funding strategy and
legislative program.
o Initiate 1980 State Facilities Needs Survey.
The major Headquarters activities related to Environ-
mental Impact Statement (EIS) Policy for Construction
Grants* are:
o Revise 40 CFR Part 6 in accordance with new
Council on Environmental Quality regulations
and new Construction Grants regulations.
o Revise the Manual for Preparation of EIS's for
201 Construction Grants Projects in accordance
with new CEQ regulations and new construction
grants regulations.
The major Headquarters activities related to municipal
operations and maintenance are:
o Follow up with Regions on implementation of
newly-issued PRMs on: (1) operational reviews
of facility plans and plans and specifications;
(2) plan of operation implementation; and
(3) required use of operations checklists.
Also, follow up with Regions previously issued
PRMs on start-up services subagreements (#77-2)
and plans of operation (#77-3).
See Guidance on Non-Regulatory' NEPA Compliance in
the Interdisciplinary Media for detailed EIS
Guidance
-------
- 125 -
o Modify the EPA/Corps of Engineers agreement
to provide for use of Corps personnel for:
(1) operational review of plans and
specifications; and (2) flagging plan of
operation compliance schedule violations.
o Provide informal guidance on: (1) correction of
design errors during Step 3 and (2) coordination
of outside start-up service related activities.
o Refine the operations checklist package.
o Evaluate O&M inspection feedback on new,
Federally funded POTWs.
o Monitor existing POTW performance levels and
problems nationally.
o Coordinate with Enforcement, et. al. on POTW
operations related issues.
o Cooperate with the National Training and
Operational Technology Center (NTOTC) on
establishment of an EPA "hotline" for referring
municipalities with O&M problems to sources
with applicable and documented solutions.
In addition to these specific activities, Headquarters
will become more actively involved in review and evaluation
of program performance, through (a) review and analysis
of performance indicators, (b) specific project reviews
(e.g., facility planning quality reviews), (c) construction
management evaluation inspections, and (d) close oversight
and assistance in areas of greatest need. In FY 1980,
particularly, this Headquarters "audit" function will
stress overview of the State delegation and the Corps
agreement.
Spill Prevention and Response
In the Spill Prevention and Response Program, management
efforts in FY 1980 and FY 1981 will be directed to:
o Provide program and policy guidance to
implement and support the National Spill
Prevention and Control Program at the
Regional and State levels, including imple-
mention of the recommendations of the EPA
Task Force on Environmental Emergencies.
-------
- 126 -
p Develop regulations and implementation
guidelines for Regional operation of a A
Hazardous Substances Spill Prevention "
and Response Program.
o Continue development of an Environmental
Response Team (ERT) capable of independent
on-scene response, individually or as a
team, to augment the Regional response
capabilities. (The ERT will be fully
operational by late 1979).
o Provide a contract-supported Technical
Assistance Team (TAT) for each Region
and for the ERT, to be managed, tasked,
and utilized at the field level to augment
resources in the Spill Prevention and Control
Program.
o Prepare guidelines for Regional contingency
plan revision.
o Revise dispersant acceptance program and
develop new dispersant test standards.
o Provide the mechanism for aerial photomapping
of significant oil and hazardous substance
spills and for aerial surveillance in support
of oil pollution prevention compliance monitor-
ing .
o Provide guidance and establish program priorities
for technical assistance and support during
disasters declared by the Federal Emergency
Management Administration (FEMA).
o Provide a coordinating mechanism for training
the ERT, Regional, State and local personnel
in hazardous substances response.
o Plan and provide for multi-Regional meetings to
review program accomplishments, program and
policy guidance, and future program directions.
Ocean Disposal and Permits
In the Ocean Disposal and Permits Program, management
in FY 1980 and FY 1981 will:
-------
- 127 -
o Prepare annual reports for Congress and the
Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative
Organization (IMCO) Ocean Dumping Convention.
o Prepare position papers and technical docu-
ments to support the Ocean Dumping Convention
(ODC) .
o Continue an environmental impact statement
(EIS) contract to re-analyze available data
on dumpsites and perform additional
baseline surveys to result in the designation
06 two municipal/industrial dumpsites.
o Revise Ocean Dumping Regulations based on new
statutory requirements, changing program needs,
and operational experience.
o Revise the Implementation and Procedures
Manual on dredge/nondredged materials; review
the bioassay manuals based on operational and
research experience in ocean dumping.
o Develop environmental guidelines for one major
offshore activity.
o Organize interagency monitoring of the Flower
Garden Banks in the Gulf of Mexico.
o Review 10 EIS's, 10 development plans, and 25
regulations for outer continental shelf lease
sales; review 3 EIS's for other offshore
activities.
Water Quality Training
Because of the resource constraints, EPA cannot
actively help States and municipalities document and
resolve workforce development and training program
development problems related to POTW noncompliance
issues, not can it substantially address the limited
capabilities of States to assume delegated Section 205
or other Water Quality Program responsibilities.
Technical and training support resources for States
and municipalities to solve workforce development and
training problems must be developed by the private
sector, State agencies, municipalities, and educational
and training institutions.
-------
- 128 -
However, the National Training and Operational
Technology Center (NTOTC) in Cincinnati, Ohio, will
provide limited resources and expertise to support
development of State and local training programs.
Instructor training, courses, instructional materials,
and complete course packages on various water quality
subjects will be provided, with special emphasis
given to Section 205 program delegations and operator
training. An expanded Instructional Resources Center
program will provide services to State and local
training programs and educational and training
institutions.
In the short term, NTOTC will also provide a limited
schedule of specialized training courses for EPA,
State, and local agency personnel. Ultimately, the
delivery system for these courses must be provided
through existing State, local and private sector
capabilities; also, through the establishment of a
number of Area Training Centers. The establishment
of Area Traning Centers will serve as an effective
extension of EPA's capabilities for training EPA and
State personnel.
NTOTC activities will include:
o Informal guidance (via a national meeting)
by July 1979 for the delivery of training
courses to Section 205 State Agency staff
and POTW personnel.
o Development, demonstration and initial
delivery of Section 205 training courses and
packages (including the training of instructors
for conducting these courses).
o Increased emphasis on training of State,
local, educational system and private sector
instructors.
o Guidance and grant funds for Section 104(g)l
and Section 109 (b) State training program
efforts.
o Development of instructional materials,
including AV units, individual modules, and
complete course packages, for use in State
and local training programs.
-------
- 129 -
Specialized direct technical training for
EPA, State, and local agency personnel. A
course schedule for FY 80 will be prepared by
June 30, 1979. It is intended that increased
State, local and private sector training
capabilities, plus the establishment of Area
Training Centers, will minimize the need for
NTOTC direct training activities.
Consultative assistance for selected municipalities
in identification, correction, prevention
and documentation of those POTW performance
problems which are significant causes of the
national noncorapliance problem.
Support of programs which will lead to the
development and documentation of new, improved,
or expanded operational technology, and related
courses, materials, and guidance.
Maintenance on the Instructional Resources
Center, including the Instructional Materials
Lending Library, the Instructional Resources
Information System (IRIS) and distribution of
the IRC Bulletin.
Development of methodology for evaluating the
effectiveness of State and local training
programs and NTOTC support needs.
Development, demonstration and provision of
courses and packages on request of OWWM
programs.
Design of technical assistance packages to
support the Public Service Employment (CETA)
program objectives of the President's Urban
Policy (new-entry O&M training and occupational
standards). Support of the President's Urban
and Rural Initiatives by continuing or develop-
ing interagency agreements with DOL, HEW, DOI
and other agencies to provide Drinking Water
and Water Quality job opportunities and training.
-------
- 130 -
Water Quality Management
Plans and Priorities, FY 80
The Water Quality Management and Standards Program
activity will emphasize an integrated Federal, State
and local partnership to address water problems
primarily through management controls, planning and
local regulation.
The fundamental goal and purpose of the Water Quality
Management Program is the development of a State and
local government decision-making process to control
point and nonpoint sources of pollution to meet
fishable and swimmable water quality goals. To meet
this goal in FY 1980, the following will be done:
o Implement the State/EPA Agreement process by
preparing guidance and other information
documents, working with other program offices
involved, establishing an information exchange/
assistance mechanism for the States and Regions,
tracking progress of Agreement development and
maintaining periodic status reports, and reviewing
other EPA and non-EPA program documents to assess
their applicability.
o Develop policy guidance and strategies for the
national WQM program, coordinate development oE
short-term policy positions, and systematize
the policy-development process for long-term
WQM policy.
o Update the National Water Quality Management
Needs Assessment which covers control of point
and nonpoint sources of pollution.
o Conduct biannual evaluations of Regional Office
management of the WQM program, placing emphasis
on leadership and long-term strategies as
opposed to reactive management; develop management
strategies with examples of management techniques.
o Manage/provide a program of effective, timely
training and technical assistance to appropriate
Federal, State, and local personnel concerning
financial planning and techniques to overcome
funding barriers to implementation of approved
plans.
-------
- 131 -
o Provide technical assistance in the areas
of ground water management, urban storm runoff
control, and advanced waste treatment (AWT)
decisions; in the area of AWT decisions, pro-
vide assistance in WQM agencies, especially
on water quality standards and wasteload
allocation issues required to make specific
AWT decisions.
o Work with Regional Offices to complete the
current triennial review of Water Quality
Standards (WQS).
o Monitor and evaluate implementation of the
cost effectiveness guidelines.
o State Water Quality Standards do not generally
contain criteria for toxic substances. EPA is
considering revising the Federal standards and
regulations so that States may be required to
adopt numerical criteria for a minimum list of
toxic substances. Even where State standards
do contain criteria for toxics, NPDES permits
frequently are not written to meet such critiera.
OWPS is attempting to remedy this through
technical assistance on: (1) wasteload
allocation procedures; and (2) methods of
implementing bioassay criteria in water quality
standards.
o Review criteria in Quality Criteria for Water
to determine which toxic constituents are
technically defensible for promulgation as
standards, ar>^ necessary to protect 1983
goal uses. However, EPA is still considering
the question of the necessity of promulgating
such standards.
o Review criteria for the 65 toxics to determine
which, if any, should be required for inclusion
into standards.
o Prepare or clarify guidance on a number of WQS
issues such as: justification for stream down-
gradings, application of WQS to intermittent
streams, inclusion of toxic criteria in WQS,
designation of outstanding natural resource
waters and other issues currently included in
Chapter 5 of Guidelines for State and Areawide
Water Quality Management Program Development.
-------
o Initiate projects to resolve interstate and
interregional inconsistencies in WQS applicable
to interstate boundary waters.
o Develop guidance for use of WQS in controlling
nonpoint sources of pollution.
o Increase WQS integration with other EPA programs
such as Water Quality Management, NPDES Permits,
Construction Grants, and TMDL assessments..
o Develop Headquarters policy guidance to Regions
and States on the third round of WQS revisions.
o Encourage and assist public participation on
the WQM program by promoting Regional Office
capability; training WQM grantees, advisory
committees, and citizens in public involvement;
supporting State and local involvement; and
coordinating public participation activities
with other programs,
o With the Regions, improve the basic policy and
guidance for AWT planning by WQM agencies and
establish better State processes for incorporating
Water Quality Standards, wasteload allocations,
effluent discharge requirements, and service
area and capabity requirements into decisions
on AWT facilities. Apply improved policy to
specific prototype situations requiring AWT
decisions.
106 Grants
Headquarters will work with the Regions, States,
interstate agencies, and other EPA offices to agree
on modifications to the present 106 allocation formula.
Based on the WQM National Needs Assessment, a work
group will work out details of a policy for determing
levels and uses of 106 funding, including considerations
of equity and defensibility. The objective of the
work group is to work out policy details for FY 81
allocations.
208 Grants
The key elements for the management of 208 grants to
State and areawide agencies are: (1) implementation
of problem solutions identified in certified and
approved WQM plans and. (2) further identification of
pollution sources, water quality relationships, and
cost-effective controls. During FY 30, the following
will be done:
-------
- 133 -
Develop guidance on Regional agricultural
strategies, provide guidance and assistance
to individual agricultural MIPs (Model Imple-
mentation Projects), coordinate with other
agencies working in agriculture, develop
guidance on the operation of the Rural Clean
Water Program 208 (j), participate on the
National Rural Clean Water Coordinating
Committee, and manage joint research studies
on agriculture pollution controls with ORD,
USDA, and USDI.
Manage and coordinate EPA's efforts to assess
urban storm runoff problems and potential
controls; with the regions, complete selection
of 15-20 prototype projects and develop
workplans; provide technical and management
assistance to the selected agencies; make a
preliminary assessment of the data, and report
to Congress on progress.
Develop joint OWPO/OWPS policies for obligation
of the $21 million in Section 201 funds earmarked
for AWT review and planning in FY 80.
Work with the Regions, States, and areawide
agencies to develop and implement controls on
construction runoff and pollution from septic
systems, with particular emphasis on fiscal
and financial aspects of controls.
With other EPA Headquarters offices, and with
the help of a contractor, manage 4-5 major
studies in selected demonstration areas on ground-
water aquifer designation and protection; work
with a consulting team to manage a hands-on
implementation assistance effort.
-------
- 134 -
o Provide guidance to Regions, States, areawide
agencies and others on methods for incorporating
water conservation into problem solutions for
agricultural runoff, municipal facilities,
urban runoff, construction runoff, and other
areas.
Clean Lakes Grants
Implement completely the new structure of Clean Lakes
Program as provided under 40 CFR 35.1600.
o Work closely with the Regional Offices to help
them understand the specific requirements of
the new regulatory procedures for the Clean
Lakes Program and to improve the operating
effectiveness of the program to acheive its
mandated objectives. This will be accomplished
through:
Development and distribution of additional
policy and program guidance under
established program information transfer
procedures (Clean Lakes Assistance
Memoranda) .
Schedule and conduct workplans for State
and Regional personnel to discuss and
exchange opinions on the new regulatory
requirements and policy and guidance
and to seek ways to further improve
these procedures.
- Meet with the Regional program personnel,
as requested, to help resolve project
specific problems.
Develop and make available a grants
assistance manual and other instructional
materials to be used by grant applicants,
grantee project managers and Regional
program coordinators.
o Continue to develop optimum program integration
between the Clean Lakes program and other EPA
and other agency programs. Such activities
would define ways to include these other pro-
grams in Clean Lakes projects during the
-------
- 135 -
project proposal stage when such integration
is most easily accomplished. Such program
cooperation can lead to reduced program costs
of all programs involved, while improving
the benefits and outputs derived from each program
and support of Agency Urban initiatives.
Emphasis will be placed on EPA's National
Urban Runoff program, the Model Implementation
Program, the development and implementation of
alternative methods to treat domestic wastes
and the Office of Research and Development
demonstration program for nonpoint source
pollution control, including storm water
treatment. Other agency programs include
those of the Departments of Agriculture, Housing
and Urban Development, and Interior.
Review all Clean Lake grant applications and
provide the Pvegions with timely grant funding
recommendations.
Continue to review the efficacy of the Clean
Lakes Program to control water pollution,
particularly nonpoint sources, to enhance
lake quality in a cost-beneficial manner.
Compile a yearly summary of the overall program
status on a project basis.
Work with the Office of Research and Development
to encourage the continued development of new
procedures, to improve existing procedures,
for lake quality enhancement.
Continue to review the adverse environmental
impacts associated with lake restoration and
define the mitigative measures available to
reduce these impacts.
Prepare and publish every two years the required
Section 307 (j) report presenting the state-of-
the-art knowledge on methods and procedures
avaialble for lake restoration.
-------
- 136 -
Changes—FY 1980
o Increased importance of State/EPA Agreements.
o Increased emphasis on national WQM priorities
— urban storm runoff, AWT planning and review
(especially regarding water quality standards,
wasteload allocations, stream classification,
and effluent requirements), agricultural
runoff, construction runoff, ground water
management, and septic system management.
106 Grants
o 106 grants will be allocated to the Regions
using the existing formula (including general
State allotments as target amounts). The
exact amounts of grants from the allotments to
the States, however, will be based on demon-
strated needs determined in the negotiations
in the State/EPA Agreement process.
o With the advent of increasing numbers of 205(g)
delegations to States, some 106 funds will be
freed up for nonconstruction purposes such as
implementation of nonpoint source controls,
504 emergency response requirements, and
hazardous and toxics monitoring.
208 Grants
o An increased percentage of 203 funds will go
into the conduct of workshops and conferences
and wider participation in activities providing
opportunity for making presentations.
o EPA will support States in 404 program develop-
ment and approval, including providing them
with model statutes and regulations; assisting
them in developing procedures and staff; con-
ducting training workshops; and coordinating the
review and approval process (working with
Regions) and nonpoint source control planning
and demonstrations.
-------
- 137 -
o WQM agencies will continue to do "up-front"
work related to facility planning in areas
where AWT decisions are being made. They will
concentrate on water quality standards issues,
wasteload allocations, and size and location
of treatment works.
o EPA will develop a water quality-based strategy,
illustrating the role of WQS.
o EPA will issue revised WQS regulations (40 CFR
130.17).
o EPA will call for increased consideration and
inclusion of toxic criteria in WQS.
o Headquarters will reassume some minimum degree
of participation in the approval/disapproval
of State Water Quality Standards.
o Headquarters will assume a direct role in
projects designed to eliminate inconsistencies
in standards applicable to interstate waters.
In the Water Quality Monitoring Program, most
main changes are in emphasis rather than in
major program redirection. However, EPA's
Blue Ribbon Monitoring Panel is addressing several
issues which may impact this guidance. Any
guidance or policy determinations generated
by this group will be factored into this Guidance
as it becomes available.
Alternatives
o A number of alternatives affecting the role
of the WQS program will be described and
debated during the effort to revise existing
40 CFR 130.17 regulations and in the development
of a water quality-based strategy.
Water Quality Management
Plans and Priorities — FY 81
o Establish a more aggressive, rather than
reactive, management stance for the WQM pro-
gram with more emphasis on national priority
problems identified in the nationwide needs
assessment.
-------
- 138 -
o Pay more attention to Regional Office manage-
ment of the WQM program, particularly with
respect to Regional organization and coordination/
integration mechanisms; make recommendations
as appropriate.
106 Grants
o With the States and Regions, evaluate the
State strategy/needs assessment method of
allocating 106 funds. Since this attempt
to improve the management of 106 funds involves
many complex issues, anticipate adjustments
in 106 funding policies for FY 82.
o Concentrate on establishing improved monitoring
practices, including improved intensive surveys
and refined, fixed-station networks; establish
improved problem assessment methodologies for
better utilization of resources.
208 Grants
o Prepare a preliminary report for Congress on
urban storm runoff problems, effects, and
controls.
o Manage hands-on technical assistance projects
in selected areas studying groundwater aquifer
designation and. protection, with the Offices
of Solid Waste and Drinking Water.
o Prepare a national summary report on results of
Model Implementation Projects for agricultural
pollution control.
o Assist the Regions and States in developing
Statewide Dredge and Fill regulatory programs
under Section 208(b) (4) (B).
Changes — FY 81
As mentioned above, Headquarters will assume a more
positive role in program management, with an emphasis
on leadership and development of long-term management
strategies as opposed to reactive management. Head-
quarters will hold each Regional Administrator account-
able for accomplishment of the outputs agreed to in
the State/EPA Agreements, and will conduct biannual
evaluations of Regional performance on management of
106 and 208 grants.
-------
- 139 -
106 Grants
o For FY 81, 106 grants will be awarded to State
and interstate agencies based on their needs,
taking into account the nationwide WQM Needs
Assessment which the Water Planning Division
will manage during FY 79 and 80. Headquarters,
the Regions, the States, and the interstate
agencies will continue to meet to work out
details of 106 funding policies.
208 Grants
o No major changes expected from FY 80.
Effluent Standards and Guidelines
Plans and Priorities, FY 80
The Effluent Guidelines Division (EGD) is a Head-
quarters function without direct counterpart Regional
organizations. However, the Division's programs
directly affect many areas of program implementation
in the Regions and States as well as Headquarters.
By virtue of the expanded mandate of the 1977 Clean
Water Act (in toxic pollutant control, conventional
pollutant control technology, sludge and "spills")
and specific requirements of the NRDC "Settlement
Agreement," the EGD role with the Office of Water
Enforcement and the Office of Solid Waste has
expanded considerably.
Within the broadly stated mission of developing
industrial point source effluent and pretreatraent
standards, there are six principal activity groups
for which this Guidance is appropriate. For each of
these activity groups, the Division is committed to
integration and coordination with all major affected
programs as summarized below for FY 80.
Toxic Pollutants Effluent Limitations. This
activity includes the plans and priorities for
establishing BAT effluent limitations, New Source
Performance Standards, and pretreatment standards
for new and existing sources.
-------
- 140 - .
o Complete sets of regulations will be promulgated
for 24 industry categories. The regulations
will set forth specific numerical standards
for toxic pollutants where possible. Certain
regulations which have already been designated
will also have an Urban and Community Impact
Analysis (EO 12074) prepared.
o In addition to the issuance of these final
rules, complete sets of regulations will be
proposed for 22 industry categoreis.
o In cooperation with ORD, OWE and other offices,
toxic pollutant treatability studies will be
performed in laboratory scale in support of both
the EGD standards setting program and the
OWE NPDES permit function.
o Work will continue with ORD, Regional laboratories
and contractor services in analytical methods
refinements, including Quality Assurance and
Quality Control for detailed quantification of
pollutant levels.
o With the support of other programs in OWPS,
work will continue in defining industry
categories or subcategories to be excluded
from national standards or deferred for develop-
ment of regulations in FY 1981 due to resource
limitations.
Conventional Pollutants and BCT Limitations. This
activity includes plans and priorities for all work
in the area of conventional pollutants for both
primary (e.g., covered by Settlement Agreement and
CWA) and other industries.
o BCT regulations will be promulgated for 24
primary industries for conventional pollutants
in conjunction with BAT regulations for toxic
pollutants.
o In the area of "secondary" industries, BCT
regulations will be promulgated.
o Work will continue on toxic "indicator" relation-
ships using conventional pollutants.
-------
- 141 -
Study of Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW).
This activity encompasses all technical evaluations
and data acquisition actions to be conducted in
support of the Agency POTW regulatory strategy,
including pretreatment, sludge guidelines, treat-
ability and toxics "problem" assessment. A short
term field sampling survey of 40 POTW1s will be
completed. Extensive treatment performance and
toxic discharge data will be collected. Similar
survey and studies by ORD will be incorporated into
this investigation, as will data and information
from 301 (h), Marine Waiver submissions.
o Action will be taken to initiate the integration
of these data with activities under OWE (Pre-
treatment Program) and OSW (sludge disposal
guidelines).
o Regional Surveillance and Analysis compliance
monitoring data will be requested to supplement
other sources.
o Regional, ORD, and Contractor laboratories will
be conducting analyses of samples.
o Preliminary treatability information will be
assembled to help define longer-term needs
for field evaluations of secondary treatment,
and advanced secondary treatment.
o Assessments of "compatibility", i.e., inter-
ference of pass-through of pollutants, will be
initiated for inclusion in industrial pretreat-
ment standards where possible.
o Intensive (4 to 6 weeks) studies of several
selected cities will be initiated to define
treatability sampling requirements and long-
term performance.
Sludge, Wastes and Spills. This activity includes
engineering analysis and data acquisition on
industrial and POTW sludge characteristics, wastes,
and sludges associated with meeting effluent
limitations, and 304 (e) best management services
for leaks, spills, runoff, etc., associated with
industrial processes.
-------
4
o Work will continue in developing mechanisms for
integration of RCRA and BAT regulatory impacts.
Support for this work will include
collection of initial data on sludge
generated by 33 industrial point
sources arid by POTWs.
A program initiated in FY 1979 with ORD
and contractors to develop sludge analysis
protocols is expected to be completed for
initial "field testing" of improved
analytical methods.
o Data collection efforts to support the develop-
ment of supplemental BMP regulations for the
control of leaks and spills, raw material
storage runoff, and sludge disposal will
continue in coordination with the Offices of
Water Enforcement and Solid Waste.
Litigation. This activity includes preparing
briefs and court records to respond to anticipated
lawsuits filed against the BAT regulations. The
Division is fairly certain of litigation in most
industry categories.
o Respond to anticipated lawsuits for promulgated
BAT regulations.
o The timing of these court challenges is unpre-
dictable, but they usually take longer than
anticipated due to the highly complex legal
and technical questions which arise. Thus,
decisions on these regulations will probably
not be forthcoming until FY 1981.
Technical Support and Assistance. This activity
includes providing consultation and technical
support to permitting authorities for non-con-
ventional waivers, and implementation of the
standards in the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) integrated permits.
o EGD intends to provide the principal technical
support to Regional and State permitting
authorities as to how to interpret and apply
regulations in situations where pollutants
have been excluded from regulations.
-------
- 143 -
This technical assistance will also
involve application of the "indicator"
concept as well as advice on subcategories
or facilities excluded from national
standards or implication involving BAT
regulation of nonconventional pollutants.
Plans and Priorities - FY 81
Toxic Pollutant Effluent Limitations
o Nine sets of industry category regulations will
be promulgated.
o Treatability studies will be focused on a larger
scale (e.g., pilot studies) for actual industrial
waste streams. Emphasis will be placed on
pollutants not readily removed or treated by
traditional methods.
o An expected 6 categories covering about 380
subcategories deferred from FY 1980 will be
investigated for developing necessary effluent
standards.
o It is anticipated that additional specific toxic
compounds will be identified for which further
sampling, analysis and technology performance
review will have to be conducted. Related
closely to this work will be increased emphasis
on investigations of "innovative" technologies
to minimize the overall discharge of all toxics
(whether identified or not) into the environ-
ment, especially concepts which reduce costs of
pollution control or result in improved pro-
duction system efficiency by recycle and reuse
of by-products and wastes.
o It is estimated that 10 categories representing
over 300 subcategories will be emphasized in
"innovative" technology review due to potential
economic impacts of BAT requirements.
Conventional Pollutants and BCT Limitations
o Promulgate BCT regulations for 9 primary industry
categories with supporting documents as described
above, as well as propose amendments or issue
"guidance" revising or confirming BCT limitations
for several food commodity industries (e.g.,
dairy products, fruits and vegetables, etc.)
in accordance with review of Sections 301 and
306 of the CWA.
-------
- 144 -
o Statistical and technical means to define
quantifiable "surrogate" relationships will be
defined for pollutant parameters common to
several (or all) industry categories. These
surrogates will represent specific levels of
conventional pollutants with associated
specific levels of one or more toxic pollutants.
Study of Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs)
o Anticipate formulation of recommendations for
a specific POTW regulatory strategy, including
support for mechanisms for pretreatment credits
at the local level, inputs to OWPO and OWE
program efforts, and possible "guidance" to
Regions and States on POTW toxics problems.
Sludge, Wastes and Spills
Supplemental BMP regulations will be proposed for
several industries where these controls are appropriate,
o Sampling and analysis of "spills" and waste
streams will be incorporated into these to help
define the potential for toxic discharges into
surface waters as well as potential mechanisms
for treatment or control by traditional or
innovative management schemes.
Litigation
o Respond to anticipated lawsuits for promulgated
BAT regulations.
o Demands for substantial additional data
collection on toxic levels in effluents,
technology performance, and environmental
impact are expected for all industries
challenged in FY 1980,
o If there are substantial successful challenges
to the earlier regulations, many others scheduled
for promulgation in FY 1981 may be delayed
pending additional work to strengthen these
later rulemaking efforts.
4
-------
- 145 -
Technical Support and Assistance
Because of the uncertainty in timing, but antici-
pated intense court activity on these regulations,
technical assistance will be made available as
necessary to advise on "best engineering judgment".
Section 402(a) permits, many of which may have to
be issued while litigation/remands are in progress.
In addition to the "indicator" concept, problem
areas are expected to be in technology transfer,
technology performance, and innovative technology.
Dredge and Fill
Plans and Priorities, FY 80
The Dredge and Fill Program focuses on a specific
water pollution problem and is especially concerned
with the impact and control of this source of
pollution as it affects the nation's wetlands. This
program is of high priority within the Office of
Water and Waste Management and plans for FY 80 and
particularly FY 81 represent intensified activities
within this area. The following plans and priorities
will be addressed in FY 1980:
o Complete and issue basic 404 regulations
(State permit programs) and issue necessary
policy guidance supplements where special
interpretations or implementing instructions
are needed.
o Provide guidance to the Regions and States on
development and operation of Statewide Dredge
and Fill regulation programs under Section
208(b) (4) (B).
o Improve support of Regional operations through
improving technical and administrative training,
operating procedures, information and data
systems (e.g., establish a computer-based
permit system), providing assistance on major/
controversial cases, etc.
o Assess 404 program research needs and initiate
programs to accomplish that research through
ORD and other organizations.
-------
- 146 -
o Initiate efforts in public information, education,
and participation through development and dis-
semination of information, general education,
and training materials.
Plans and Priorities - FY 31
In the Dredge and Fill Program, the following plans
and priorities will apply for FY 1981:
o Accelerate emphasis in solving remaining
problems with regard to program management
and operations and threats to aquatic eco-
systems through research, information and
education, monitoring and evaluation,
assistance to Regions, etc.
o Participate actively in providing assistance
to States (as above) and in coordinating and
assisting with State program review/approval.
Changes - FY 81
The only major change for the Dredge and Fill Program
will be moving from a rulemaking to a program
management emphasis in FY 81.
Monitoring and Data Support
Plans and Priorities - FY 80
In the Water Quality Monitoring Program, emphasis on
toxic pollutants will continue as top priority, with
a major thrust on developing national standards under
Section 307(a) for selected priority pollutants,
identification of additional local "hot spots" for
regulatory emphasis, and intensive work to upgrade
control options in geographic areas where technology-
based controls will not be adequate to meet water
priority goals. Planned monitoring activities
include continuation of FY 80 programs, plus:
o Upgrading of water quality based controls for
conventional and toxic pollutants, including
water quality criteria and standards to
supplement technology-based controls.
-------
- 147 -
o Integration of multi-media, multi-source toxic
pollutant monitoring data systems, and quality
assurance programs.
o Provision of environmental information for
developing Section 307(a) standards for
selected priority pollutants.
o Improvement of EPA capabilities to make assess-
ments of public health and critical environ-
mental concerns in the absence of local or
State capabilities.
o Operation of data systems and improvement of
access.
o Continuation of interagency agreements for
toxics and conventional monitoring with the
Fish and VJildlife Service and the Geological
Survey.
o Guidance of mandatory quality assurance/quality
control program for EPA, State, contractor, and
permittee laboratories.
o Guidance of implementation of biological monitor-
ing and data interpretation programs.
o Initiation of representative "before and after"
water quality impacts of BAT.
WATER QUALITY ENFORCEMENT
Plan and Priorities - FY 80
The highest priority for the Enforcement Program
during FY 1980 will be response to emergency situations
involving substantial threats to public health and
safety.
o Headquarters will provide technical and legal
assistance in the event of an emergency
situation.
The program's next priority is to complete by the end
of FY 1980 the major source enforcement effort against
violators of the July 1, 1977, deadline, including
municipalities. While other than Major Source Enforce-
ment Effort enforcement actions will continue, MSEE
referrals will receive primary emphasis, pending
resolution.
-------
- 148 -
o Headquarters will provide legal and
technical assistance to the Regions to
complete all cases pending with the
U.S. Attorney and the Department of Justice.
o Track and expedite processing of all actions
with the U.S. Attorney and the Department of
Justice to their ultimate disposition.
Full compliance by all Federal facilities, major
and most minor, will be achieved no later than the
end of FY 1980.
o Headquarters will provide the technical and legal
assistance required to achieve this goal,
taking an active role, as needed, in negotiation
of consent agreements.
o Track and monitor compliance status for all
Federal facilities in delegated and non-
delegated States.
As the MSEE effort draws near completion in FY 1980,
Headquarters will reevaluate its existing compliance
monitoring and enforcement program and plan for an
improved program designed to assure compliance from
municipal and non-municipal permittees.
o Review and evaluate the Compliance Monitoring
and Inspection Program, including:
- CEIs
- CSIs; CSIs (Toxics)
biomonitoring
performance audits
DMR quality assurance
o Review Regional programs for State overview
procedures.
o Expand management information system capabilities,
-------
- 149 -
- During the last quarter of FY 1980,
Headquarters will become involved in
the overview of EMS implementation in the
NPDES States through review and evaluation
of the audit procedures implemented by
the Regions. The Headquarters Compliance
Branch will carry out this overview through
the Regional Liaison Program and through
special audits of the EMS.
Continue work on developing automatic DMR
processing capabilities. Begin loading permit
limitation data. The loading of the DMR
parametric data will follow, upon completion
of the loading of the permit data. The auto-
matic violation detection capability of
Compliance Assurance System will be
operational in FY 1931
o Review and evaluate the Federal, Regional,
and State ADP information systems.
o Develop a strategy for use of contractors in
compliance monitoring activities.
o Examine reallocation of Headquarters and
Regional resources (shift from MSEE to
continuous compliance activities).
Develop and expand activities in the areas of toxic
and hazardous substances control.
o Develop and implement a pretreatment compliance/
enforcement program before the end of FY 1980.
o Before the end of the FY 1980, begin an
overview for implementing procedures to track
and assure compliance with pretreatment
requirements.
o Provide legal and technical support, as needed,
for any enforcement actions involving hazardous
materials spills.
o Overview monitoring and enforcement efforts for
compliance with second-round permit requirements.
o Provide legal and technical support for enforce-
ment actions involving second-round permits.
-------
- 150 -
Overview phased implementation of the Municipal
Strategy, which is designed to achieve coordination
between program offices within the Agency for the
purpose of bringing municipalities into compliance
with the requirements of the Clean Water Act in the
most efficient and effective manner.
o Complete the PCS/GICS interface.
o Audit the Regions to promote maintenance of
Enforcement/Grants interface.
o Track compliance by municipal facilities.
Improve program management methods by:
o Reviewing Quarterly Noncompliance Reports.
o Coordinate in developing a strategy to resolve
second-round NPDES adjudicatory hearings.
o Develop and/or implement enforcement strategies
for the following categories, coordinating
where necessary with other programs:
Chemicals
Petroleum refineries
State and local governments
Iron and steel
Electric utilities
Federal facilities.
Plans and Priorities - FY 81
The Enforcement Program's highest priority during
FY 1981 will be response to emergency situations
involving substantial threats to public health and
safety.
o Headquarters will provide technical and legal
assistance in the event of an emergency
situation.
-------
- 151 -
Following response to emergencies, the highest
Enforcement priorities-during FY 1981, will be
referral of schedule and effluent limitation violators
to the U.S. Attorney and the Department of Justice
for enforcement action, and resolution of pending
cases.
o Headquarters will focus efforts and resources
on whatever case support is necessary to
expedite case referral and resolution, providing
technical and legal aid as needed.
o Headquarters will monitor all cases to ensure
compliance.
o Headquarters will provide technical and legal
support in enforcement cases involving non-
compliance with pretreatment, hazardous
substances and toxics requirements.
o Headquarters will overview monitoring and
enforcement efforts for compliance with
second-round permit limitations.
o Headquarters will provide legal and technical
support for enforcement actions against non-
complying second-round permittees.
Headquarters will continue overview of municipal policy
and strategy; provide legal and technical assistance
in carrying out strategy.
Program management methods will be improved by:
o Continuing audits to maintain EMS/Grants.
o Evaluating ONCRs.
o Implementing enforcement strategies for
the following categories:
Chemicals
- Petroleum refineries
State and local governments
-------
- 152 -
Changes - FY 30
Emphasis in FY 80 will be placed on resolution
of all MSEE referrals.
Greater attention will also be directed toward
bringing Federal facilities, both major and minor,
into compliance with requirements of the Clean
Water Act.
Focus will shift to enforcement of second-round
permit limitations (BAT and BCPT requirements).
Pretreatment and revised hazardous substances, regula-
tions will be promulgated before the end of FY 79.
For those remaining major and minor Federal facilities
not in compliance, every effort will be made to
ensure that those Federal facilities are brought
into compliance with the Clean Water Act during FY 1981,.
o Headquarters will provide any legal and technical
support necessary to bring these sources into
compliance as early in the year as possible,
taking an active role, as needed, in negotiation
of consent agreements.
o Headquarters will monitor major Federal facilities
to ensure compliance.
The Office of Enforcement will implement the improved
Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Program to
ensure continuous compliance. As part of this, the
following activities will be undertaken:
o Make adjustments, as needed, to compliance
monitoring program procedures and guidelines.
o Continue reviewing Regional programs for State
overview procedures.
o Implementation of a strategy for use by con-
tractors in compliance monitoring activities.
o Overview expansion of management information
system capabilities, including the following:
Overview of EMS in NPDES States.
Overview implementation of automatic DMR
processing capability (majors).
-------
- 153 -
- Ensure data quality for D.MR data entry
from States.
The Office of Enforcement will continue support to
toxic and hazardous substances control activities,
including the following:
o Overview tracking and monitoring procedures
to assure compliance with pretreatment,
hazardous substances. *nd toxics requirements.
These will be the focus of new initiatives in FY 80;
new initiatives will cover toxics compliance
monitoring and enforcement as well.
Changes - FY 81
Considerable emphasis will be placed in FY 81 on
developing and implementing new or revised compliance
monitoring and enforcement programs designed to
ensure continuous compliance with requirements of
the Clean Water and Ocean Dumping Acts.
Alternatives for Carrying Out theProgram - FY 81
Consider contracting out more compliance monitoring
inspections.
WATER ENFORCEMENT - PERMITS ISSUANCE
In keeping with the Agency's objectives of implementing
toxic controls and regulatory reform efforts, the
Headquarters' plan for FY 1980/31 will focus on activities
attendant to the issuance of EAT/toxic permits and the
permits consolidation effort.
Plans and Priorities - FY 80/31
Priority activities for Headquarters in FY 1980/81
will focus on toxic substance control, improving
permitting methods through the consolidated permit
effort, and meeting the requirements of the CWA.
Headquarters' activities with respect to toxic control
include finalization of the BMP regulations, develop-
ment of the permit application form which will require
information on the presence of toxic pollutants, and
issuance of guidance on primary industry permit
-------
- 154 -
reissuance. In addition, Headquarters in FY 1980 will
manage a $2 million contract to provide assistance to
localities in developing pretreatment programs for
the control of toxic pollutants. Additional pre-
treatment efforts in 1980 include provision of guidance
to the Regions on approving local programs and making
final approval decisions on State pretreatment
programs.
Activities relating to improved permitting methods
will focus primarily on the implementation of the
consolidated permit effort. In FY 1980 the permits
program will focus Jon issuing guidance to the Regions
on developing consolidated permitting procedures and
writing consolidated permits. In addition, a group
of multi-disciplinary professionals, centered in the
Permits Division at Headquarters, will be responsible
for integrating policy guidance developed for the
various consolidated permit programs nationwide.
Many of the new responsibilities imposed by the
CWA will require initial implementation efforts by
Headquarters in FY 1980. FY 1980 will see the develop-
ment of regulations for Section 301 (c) and (g)
variances (economic and environmental variances) and
development of regulations for Section 301 (k), innovative
technology variances. Additionally, the Headquarters'
Permit Program will be responsible for concurring in
approvals of State 404, Underground Injection Control
(UIC) and RCRA programs,. and modifying NPDES State
programs according to the provisions of the CWA.
In addition to responding to new CWA requirements,
the Headquarters' program in FY 1980 will need to
continue ongoing program efforts such as consideration
of fundamentally different factors variances, review
and approval of requests for NPDES State program
approval, review of adjudicatory hearings stipulations,
and Headquarters assistance to Regional Offices in
responding to Section 316 requests for thermal variances.
Changes - FY 30/81
The major changes between FY 1979 Headquarters Permit?
Program efforts and those activities outlined in the
FY 1980/31 Guidance are the initiation of the Permits
Consolidation effort and the increased focus on toxic
pollutants via the pretreatment program and the
second-round permitting effort. These changes in
program emphasis are reflected in increased Guidance
-------
- 155 -
attention to new programs such as Permits Consolidation
and pretreatment and the development of associated
regulations. In addition, there will be some changes
in Headquarters' activities between FY 1980 and 1931.
In 1981, the Headquarters component of the permits
issuance decision unit will address the consolidation
of State permit programs. This activity translates
into developing communications channels for States to
encourage the assumption of consolidated permit pro-
grams, providing guidance to States on acceptable
components of consolidated programs, and providing
technical assistance to States, where necessary, in
developing consolidated permits. Additionally,
Headquarters activities in 1981 will be directed
at expanding the permit consolidation effort to
other Federal agencies. Finally, Headquarters'
activities in 1981 will include modification of the
pretreatment and consolidated regulations to ensure
that the requirements of these programs are integrated.
Alternatives
As the majority of the permit issuance activities
at Headquarters revolve around regulation and guidance
development responsibilities, there is little room
for substitution of outside contractor personnel.
However, use of contractor personnel in making pre-
liminary determinations on the increasing number of
variance requests which must be addressed by Head-
quarters in FY 1980/1981 might be feasible. In addition,
the Headquarters program has used, and will continue
to use, contractor support in developing program
publications which explain in layman's terms the
various regulations promulgated by the Office. Con-
tractor support has also been used in developing
programs for necessary public participation in the
NPDES program. In FY 1979 and continuing into FY 1980,
the Headquarters program will use contractor support
to provide assistance to localities and States in
implementing the National Pretreatment Program. This
contractor assistance is provided in lieu of increasing
the Regional staffs to the levels which would be
required to initiate the pretreatment program.
-------
- 156 -
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
General R&D Management
In FY 80 and FY 81 EPA's R&D program will have three
major management goals:
o Continue the integration into the main stream of
the Agency's activities of all of ORD's research
in support of regulation and enforcement.
o Enhance ORD's capability to provide better data
for future Agency regulatory and enforcement
actions.
o Improve the quality and utility of scientific
and technical data used by the Agency.
Actions to be taken to achieve these goals include
the following:
Establish Research Committees to cover all water
quality research in support of regulations and
enforcement.
Currently one Research Committee exists —
Industrial Wastewater Research. Three Committees
will be established during FY 79 to cover
essentially all research conducted in support of
water quality regulation and enforcement.
Water Resources (relating primarily to OWPS
activities).
Industrial Wastewater (broadening the existing
Industrial Wastewater Committee).
Municipal Wastewater, Ocean Disposal, and Spill
Prevention (relating primarily to OWPO activi-
ties) .
One major concern is how to incorporate require-
ments and views of the Regional Offices into the
Research Committee process. This will make it
necessary for the Regional Offices to coordinate
their participation and share responsibility for
representing regional interests.
-------
- 157 -
Develop an exploratory research effort which
applies the Nation's best scientific capability
to addressing future Agency problems.
Fifteen percent of ORD resources for water quality
will be devoted to research which has the purpose
of applying the best available scientific capa-
bilities to research which looks beyond immediate
(1-3 years) Agency needs or involves higher risk
but potentially higher pay-off than research
normally undertaken in support of regulation or
enforcement. This effort will be developed by ORD
in consultation with the scientific community
external to the Agency. All plans for exploratory
research will be reviewed by the Agency's Research
Committees.
Scientific peer review of Agency research projects
and reports.
Mechansims will be established to ensure, wherever
feasible, scientific peer review of the plans for
and results from individual research projects.
Establish an environmental criteria and assess-
ment function!
This involves completion of the staffing and imple-
mentation of ORD's new Office of Health and
Environmental Assessment in order to provide consis-
tency in the Agency's risk assessments and provide
water quality assessments upon request by the
Agency.
During FY 80 and FY 81, "technology transfer"
activities will no longer be planned and budgeted
separately. Plans and resources for technology
transfer in a given program, e.g., municipal waste-
water, are to be included in Decision Units for
that program.
Health and Research
o Determine the health implications of existing
and new technology for the treatment, disposal
and reuse of wastewater and sludge.
-------
- 158 -
o Determine the health effects of priority toxic
pollutants.
o Develop rapid screening tests suitable for
extrapolation to man for characterization of
toxic pollutants in complex effluents.
o Develop recreational water quality criteria.
Research will proceed as described in the FY 80 budget,
except for the following:
o In developing screening tests which can be
extrapolated to man , mammalian and in vitro
tests will be considered along with bioassay
tests normally used by aquatic biologists.
o Current discussions may lead to a new effort
for nonpoint sources.
Environmental Processes and Effects
Freshwater environmental effects research will focus
on the following priority areas in FY 80 and FY 81:
o Nonpoint source impacts, including recovery
rates and mentoring methods .
o Test protocols for toxics, including mutagenic
and carcinogenic effects.
o Effects evaluation of complex toxic effluents.
o Test methods for the bioaccumulation potential
organics .
o Environmental effects of land application of
municipal wastes.
Marine environmental effects research will address:
o Methods for measuring the relative "health" of
marine ecosystems.
o Simulation techniques, including "microcosms" for
predicting pollutant stress on marine biota
and ecosystems.
o Effects of specific pollutants from ocean dumping,,
outfalls, dredged materials, and other sources
pollutant transformation products, and combina-
tions of pollutants on marine biota and ecosystems
-------
- 159 -
o Questions of wetland function and importance.
Transport and fate research goals include:
o Expansion of selected water quality predictive
models to include toxics and sediments.
o Development and joint evaluation with OWWM
of a method for determining gross environmental
"mass balances" for toxics.
o A continued, limited effort to verify selected
water quality predictive models, primarily
through use of existing data, with emphasis
on utility for wasteload allocations and advanced
waste treatment facility decisions.
o Studies of the transport and fate of selected
pollutants in the marine environment.
The Great Lakes research program will in FY 80, verify
phosophorous-plankton models used in load reduction
simulations, and begin an effort to expand in FY 81,
research on the risks to man from toxics transported
through the lakes system.
The Chesapeake Bay research program will carry through
studies, just initiated, on assessing, in reference to
competing uses of the Bay, existing and projected
consequences of toxics and nutrient loadings on the
Bay system, human health and the economy of the Bay.
Measurement and Monitoring
Measurement methods research in FY 80 and FY 81 will
address:
o Broader spectrum and more cost-effective methods
for screening and quantifying organics in water
and wastewater, with increased attention in FY 81
to nonvolatile organics.
o Completion in FY 81 of identification of
volatile organics in industrial effluents (in
direct support of Effluent Guidelines Division,
OUTS) .
-------
- 160 -
o More cost-effective multi-element and chemical
specification methods, with emphasis in FY 81
on techniques for soils, sediments and sus-
pended solids.
Quality Assurance Program Activities will include:
o Completion in FY 80 of analytic methods and
quality assurance materials for consent decree
toxics in sludges, ambient waters and fish
tissues.
o Evaluation of surrogate methods for toxics in
effluents and sludges.
o Evaluation of alternative monitoring methods
for enforcement.
o Quality assurance support for all Agency labora-
tories and Agency sponsored contracts.
Monitoring methods and systems research will include:
o Correction of deficiencies and analytic methods
for consent decree toxics in effluents, sludges
and ambient waters.
o Specifications for EPA approved Regional sampling
and monitoring instruments.
o Development of pathogen idenfication and
concentration procedures.
o Evaluation of biological monitoring systems.
o Development of monitoring system concepts for
linking Agency monitoring systems to facilitate
correlation of monitoring data with health
statistical data.
Technical support program will provide:
o Remote sensing support for spill prevention and
emergency oil spill response activities.
o Monitoring and analytic support, consultation,
and expert testimony, as needed.
-------
- 161 -
Control Technology
In FY 80 the Industrial Wastewater Control R&D program
will focus on:
o Optimization of available treatment methods and
development of innovative technologies for
control of toxic pollutants.
o Laboratory and pilot scale treatability studies
for priority pollutants.
o Development of BMP's for industrial sources not
readily covered by BAT or revised BAT.
o Technology development for control of hazardous
materials spills,
o Initiation of a major program for evaluation
and development of reuse/recycle technologies.
o Major effort to evaluate and establish ways in
which to minimize intermedia impacts from
wastewater pollution abatement practices.
In FY 81, the Industrial Wastewater Control Program
will continue the initiatives described under FY 80,
and in addition, will include:
o Demonstration of reuse and recycle systems for
those industrial segments which contribute a
high number of the 129 priority pollutants in
their discharge.
o Acceleration of development of technology to
support an Agency emergency response capability
for the control of hazardous waste incidents
of all types.
o Technology transfer of reuse/recycle technology
to industrial users.
o Assessments and treatability studies on toxic
pollutants to be added to the original list of
priority pollutants.
-------
- 162 -
Municipal control technology priorities will include:
Sludge:
o Evaluation of innovative and alternative
technology projects,
o Assessment of exposure levels of organics,
metals, and pathogens from land application.
o Development of beneficial uses, including
energy recovery technologies.
o Evaluation of detoxification methods.
Toxics:
o Characterization of sources and magnitude.
o Determination and development of predictive
methods for treatability.
o Evaluation of urban-wide toxics control and
pre-treatment strategies.
o Evaluation of promising control strategies.
Small flows/land treatment:
o Demonstration of central management of on-site
systems.
o Extension of overland flow systems to colder
climates.
o Evaluation of toxics management in land
application systems.
o Investigation of higher rate nutrient uptake
systems.
Process development:
o Treatment systems for small communities.
o Combined sewer overflow management and. technology.
o Evaluation of reuse demonstrations.
-------
- 163 -
o Evaluation of high rate biological systems
for removal of specific pollutants.
o Development of surrogate control parameters.
Cincinnati Test and Evaluation Facility:
o Response to short-term needs of Regions and
Program Offices.
Agricultural control technology will emphasize:
o Field evaluation of best management practices,
in coordination with the Model Implementation
Program and Rural Clean Water Program.
o Validation of recently developed pollutant
loading models.
-------
- 164
REGIONAL GUIDANCE
Construction Grants; Municipjal Operations
Priorities; FY 80 and 81
The Construction Grants Program Guidance covers all the
activities necessary to administer grants for construction
of publicly-owned treatment works, pursuant to Title II
of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended by
the Clean Water Act of 1911. Regional Construction Grants
activities cross organizational lines, and may involve
personnel from the Water Division, Management Division,
S&A Division, and the Office of Civil Rights. This
Program Guidance also encompasses personnel performing
environmental reviews of construction projects, including
preparation of EIS's, and operations and maintenance (O&M)
related activities. (See Guidance on Non-Regulatory
NEPA Compliance in Interdisciplinary Media Section for
detailed EIS guidance.)
The specific program priorities for FY 1980 reflect the
major emphasis toward decentralized management and
continued program quality outlined in the Title II regu-
lations and various Program Requirements Memoranda (PRMs)
and Program Operations Memoranda (POMs), In general
terms, the program priority continues to require that the
obligation rate be developed consistent with the primary
emphasis on environmental and fiscal quality and full
implementation of the law. For purposes of planning
FY 1980/1981 activities, therefore, the Regions are to put
primary emphasis on environmental management, sound pro-
gram management, and project integrity. The obligation
goals are to be developed and achieved at levels that
take account of this environmental and management emphasis.
This primary emphasis on quality, however, does not lessen
to any degree the principal purpose of the program, which
is to make grants to municipalities and to get treatment
plants built and operational. As more resources are made
available to the program through State delegation and the
Corps, obligation rates are expected to increase. The
Regions, in developing their operating plans based on
limited resources, must strike a balance between the need
to manage obligation goals and the requirements for
ensuring program and fiscal integrity. Through the deve-
lopment of the Regional operating plans, the Regions are
to determine that mix of activities which minimizes the
-------
- 165 -
adverse impact of tradeoffs and provides the best
balance among competing objectives. In all cases, a
tradeoff of one activity against another should be
evaluated and analyzed in the Regional program plans
for its impact on program performance.
The development of FY 1980 program plans must explicitly
address at the outset how the limited resources available
will be utilized to meet the FY 1980/1981 objectives
outlined above. Since the resource base has not increased
in line with the vastly increased responsiblities thrust
upon EPA under the Clean Water Act, specific activity
tradeoffs must be identified and evaluated to determine
the risk involved in incomplete program management.
Although State delegation will provide a longer term
solution to the resource problem, the resource problems
in FY 1980 are not expected to be mitigated significantly.
How each Region addresses this problem in FY 1980 should
be the central focus of the program plans to be developed.
Given the need to balance the grant objectives against
overall quality requirements, the following list of
major program areas is to be used as a guide for assessing
relative priorities among the major activities (the
highest priority efforts are listed first):
1. Environmental Management. The Clean Water Act
provided a great number of amendments related to the
facility planning phase, all of which are absolutely
essential for project quality and proper environmental
management. The facility planning effort is of highest
priority, particularly assuring that facilities affording
treatment more stringent than secondary receive careful
review; that the cost-effectiveness guidelines are fully
complied with to ensure quality projects at minimum costs;
and that the use of innovative and alternative technology
approaches receives increasing emphasis in FY 1980. The
Regions should develop a strategy that includes a mix of
front-end activities (pre-application conferences, mid-
course meetings, public participation, final review,
etc.) to ensure that the three high priority objectives
of facility planning are met.
2. Delegation and Management of Program Activities
Under Section 205(g) and the Corps Agreement.Given
limited EPA manpower in the Construction Grants Program
to accomplish the full legislative mandate, a strategy
on resource usage that makes effective use of State,
-------
- 166 -
Corps, and EPA resources is essential as part of the
operating plan development. Regional strategies are
to place emphasis on State delegation as the preferred
manpower alternative over the long term; thus, the
Corps effort should be gradually phased out over time
in favor of State delegation. Regarding State delegation
policy:
o Regions are to continue to thoroughly evaluate
the ability of any State to administer the
program in full compliance with all EPA policy
and environmental objectives prior to the award
of the initial Section 205 (g) grant.
o Prior to the award of the initial grant, Regions
must ensure that realistic and complete manpower
planning analyses and phase-in schedules are
provided by the State, and should take all steps
necessary to ensure sufficient staffing by the
States to meet the full intent of the legislation.
o Given the resource constraints faced by EPA,
emphasis placed on delegation monitoring after full
phase-in by the State should be greater on front-
end activities and lesser on Step 2 and Step 3
activities; the Regions should provide only the
minimum necessary monitoring effort on grant
related activities not related to environmental
objectives .
Regarding Corps policy, the Regions should encourage
maximum use of the Corps resources (in lieu of State
delegation) to meet the full intent of the National
Agreement. Where appropriate, Regions should expand their
use of the Corps to include activities such as value
engineering reviews, sewer evaluation survey reviews,
operational reviews of the plans and specifications,
project close-out, or other activities that make use of
their technical expertise. Monitoring of the Corps
should be the minimum necessary to ensure program in-
tegrity and activity coordination, with increasing respon-
sibility given to the Corps to resolve issues previously
done by EPA.
3. Program Planning and Management. A continued
high priority effort must be provided by the Regions to
-------
- 167 -
improve program management and protect the fiscal and
technical integrity of the program. This effort should
focus on the following areas:
o The continued high emphasis on outlay manage-
ment, including the estimation of realistic and
achievable outlay estimates, as well as the
management of project schedules to achieve out-
lay targets.
o The setting and achievement of obligation goals
that reflect the existing mix of active projects
and the need to level out workload during the
year, recognizing that obligation levels will
increase as more resources (State, Corps, and
EPA) are brought to bear on the program.
o The use of the Municipal Enforcement Strategy as
one of the foundations for the program management
strategy.
o The establishment and maintenance of improved,
multiple-year project planning thru the five-
year priority list—linked to the Needs Survey,
the NPDES permit program, and the State Water
Quality Management Plans.
o The review and use of the priority list for day-
to-day management of the program. Priority list
management will be the vehicle for Construction
Grants program planning.
o The monitoring of all Step 1 active projects to
ensure timely completion of the facility planning
process.
o The monitoring of all projects immediately after
Step 3 award to ensure early construction starts.
o The monitoring of all Step 3 projects to ensure
timely project completion, close-out, and
resolution of audit exceptions.
o The maximum use of the Regional Construction
Grants Management Information System (RCGMIS)
for effective program and project management.
-------
- 168 -
The resources provided through the Corps agreement and
State delegation will be the primary sources of manpower
to accomplish most of the program management initiatives.
The Regional effort should focus on long-term planning
and overall management and coordination, including
management of obligation and outlay goals.
4. Environmental Review and EIS Preparation. A
continued high priority should be placed on early environ-
mental review of projects during the facility plan develop-
ment through "piggybacking" and "layering" techniques to
streamline the NEPA process and ensure more sensitive
reviews. Emphasis should also be placed on coordinating
EPA project planning with the planning efforts of other
Federal agencies to provide for better environmental
reviews of the cumulative effects of Federal actions.
While the principal objectives of the environmental
review process should be improved projects either with
or without an EIS, the Agency's output of EIS's relative
to the size of the program is still so low that we must
continue to strive to prepare more EIS's when resources
are available to do so. Specific guidance on relative
priorities within EIS preparation is stated in the Inter-
disciplinary Media Section of this Guidance.
5. Operations and Maintenance. Operational require-
ments are to receive high priority in FY 1980. Beginning
in FY 1979 and continuing through FY 1980, the Office of
Water Program Operations will be developing a series of
guidance packages to clarify operational requirements of
the Construction Grants Program. The Regions should
ensure that construction grants are not closed-out until
there is acceptable evidence that POTW's are capable of
being operated reliably at levels set forth by their NPDES
discharge requirements. Increased effort should also be
directed at identifying existing POTW's that do not
comply with NPDES permit requirements and conducting
performance evaluations when needed.
Certain other program areas—such as Minority
Business Enterprise, Public Participation, EEO and
Davis-Bacon—are Agencywide or Government initiatives
and are non-discretionary. All other activities not
specifically noted above are essential for program
integrity but of relatively lower priority.
-------
- 169 -
Activities; FY 80 and 81
The specific Regional activities that are encompassed
within the priority areas noted above number approximately
75, broken principally into Step 1 activities, Step 2
activities, Step 3 activities, delegation and Corps
management and oversight, program planning, information
system control, and other support activities. The
Construction Grants Resource Model provides this activity
listing and its relative resource pricing. This model
should be used, to the maximum extent possible, in
evaluating the resource impact of various priority options.
(The model and technical assistance on its use are
available from the Office of Water Program Operations.)
Not included in the existing resource model are O&M
related activities. Activities necessary to support
increased emphasis on operational requirements (as
described above) are as follows:
o Implement PRMs (issued during FY 1979) on
(1) use of operational checklists; (2) opera-
tional reviews of facility plans and plans and
specifications and (3) conditioning Step 3 grants
or grantee compliance on plans of operation
schedules.
o Use grant sanctions as necessary to ensure
grantee response to operational requirements and
to ensure grantee commitment to adequate O&M for
completed projects.
o Conduct O&M inspections and follow-up inspections,
as necessary, before close-out of the Step 3
grant.
o Conduct one-year O&M inspections on close-out
projects to verify performance or flag problems.
o Overview State O&M inspections and performance
evaluations on existing POTW's. Conduct EPA
inspections as necessary to supplement the State
O&M inspections programs.
o Coordinate with Enforcement to ensure responsive
action to performance-related problems for both
newly completed and existing POTW's.
-------
- 170 -
Spill Prevention and Response
Planning Assumptions
o The Hazardous Substances Regulations
(designation, reportable quantity), will
become effective in May-June, 1979, and
will require notification by the discharger
of spill incidents and an initial situation
assessment.
o EPA will receive notice of approximately
2,000 incidents per year involving hazardous
substances. Between 700 and 1,200 will
involve one or more of the 299 designated
substances.
o Section 311 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)
gives specific authorities and responsi-
bilities to the President. Although these
responsibilities cannot be delegated to
State agencies or to individuals, States
can participate by (1) providing assistance
to Federal operations, (2) legislatively
establishing their own spill and emergency
response capability, and (3) seeking
reimbursement under Section 311(k) of State
funds spent on spill cleanup.
o Section 106 grant funds, which may become
available as a result of Section 205(g)
delegations, will be reprogrammed into high
priority activities identified in State/EPA
Agreements (SEAs), including environmental
emergencies and spill prevention/control
activities.
Priorities; FY 80 and 81
Regional priority in FY 1980 and FY 1981 must be
given to on-scene emergency responses to spills of
oil and/or designated hazardous substances which
contaminate or threaten public drinking water supplies,
which cause or threaten danger to public health and
welfare, or which constitute an environmental
emergency and threaten or cause severe
damage to sensitive ecological systems or to the
spill environment. Further, EPA must be prepared
to respond to incidents involving materials other
than oil and designated hazardous substances that cause
or threaten to cause health or environmental damage.
-------
•- 17.1. -
The specific priori i-jes for FY 1,980 are listed below
in descending order of priority:
o Expand, uti li z'big i-esources available from
increased resource allocations, Technical
Assistance Teams (^2, or more personnel)
and the ERT (8 member team) capabilities
for on-scene response to major spills of
oil and hazardous substances that threaten
public health arid welfare or sensitive
ecological areas, with particular emphasis
on drinking water supplies.
o Respond on-scene to direct Federal cleanup/
litigation or monitor cleanup/litigation
actions taken by a discharger to all reported
spills and environmental emergencies within
resource capabilities.
o Respond within the limits of available
resources and mandated program responsi-
bilities to those environmental emergencies
involving non-311 substances that threaten
life, public health and welfare,,
o Conduct prevention compliance inspections
and other prevention related projects at a
lower priority than ori-scene response actions.
o Provide technical assistance and support as
requested by Federal Emergency Management
Administration during declared disaster
episodes.
o Revise Regional contingency plans for incor-
poration of hazardous substances response
mechanisms.
o Give environmental damage assessments and
technical assistance to other Federal
agencies, States, and site restoration
operations lower priority until additional
resources permit greater activity.
o Review resources assigned to the. Regional
spill prevention and control decision unit
to determine the maximum utilization of
positions for qualified On-Scene Coordi-
nators, and mimize assignment of personnel
-------
- 172 -
to administrative/clerical operations or
to actions outside the Spill Prevention
and Control Program.
Activities; FY 80 and 81
o Maintain a capability to receive immediate
notification of spills of oil, hazardous
substances, and other environmental emer-
gencies on a 24-hour a day basis.
o Encourage dischargers to assume cleanup/
litigation responsibility.
o Respond to major spill incidents, providing
qualified, on-scene coordinators (OSC) to
coordinate the response and maintain adequate
surveillance to determine that removal
actions are being properly carried out.
o Implement within available resources an
aggressive spill prevention program for non-
transportation related facilities, including
compliance inspections, review and amendment
of Spill Prevention Control and Counter-
measure CSPCC) plans, aerial surveillance,
and timely issuance of notices of violation.
o Prepare, revise and update on a continuing
basis local, State, Regional contingency plans.
o Plan and coordinate the resources necessary
to respond to requests for assistance during
Federally-declared disasters to include
planning, field damage surveys, and cost
estimating assistance.
o Work aggressively with the State governments
to prepare them to assume a more active role
in the Spill Response Program, in accordance
with the recommendations of the EPA Task
Force on Environmental Emergencies.
o Urge States to develop adequate emergency
authority, contingency plans, and draft
enabling legislation that includes permission
for contingency funds for environmental
emergencies and Spill Response Programs;
urge inclusion as high priority items in
State/EPA Agreements (SEAs) and in Section
-------
- 173 -
106 grant applications of Spill Prevention
and Control and Emergency Response program
activities.
Ocean Disposal and Permits
Planning Assumptions
o All interim permits are to phase out by the
end of 1981, by regulation. All dumping of
harmful sewage sludge is to stop by the end
of 1981, by statute.
o Ocean Dumping under special permits is
expected to attain a slightly higher level
in FY 1980/1981 as a result of implementation
of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act, the elimination of marginal and unsatis-
factory disposal of harmful sewage sludge,
and an increase in incineration-at-sea
applications which will require site designa-
tions and monitoring.
o Probable changes in the International Ocean
Dumping Convention will require changes in
U.S. Ocean Dumping criteria during the next
few years, particularly in radioactive waste
disposal and incineration-at-sea. The
program is responsible for both international
negotiation and changing criteria.
o New and changing ocean technologies, i.e.,
in situ at-sea incineration, deep ocean
dTilling, deep sea mining, ocean thermal
emergy conversion, and operations near
marine sanctuary areas, require development
of industry specific environmental guide-
lines and site specific disposal permit
conditions.
Priorities, FY 80 and 81
Major Regional goals and priorities are the following:
An overall increase in Ocean Dumping program activity
is expected over the next few years, not a decrease.
The phase-out of interim permits is a minor part of
the overall program and has little resource impact,
(less than 5% of total volume dumped, including
dredged material). Regions' and Headquarter's
-------
- 174 -
workloads will not be reduced over the next few
years because of continued litigation and enforce-
ment action toward major interim permittees (e.g.,
Philadelphia, New York); an increase in ocean-dumped,
dredge material permit activity by the Corps, as a
result of new channel deepening projects; and
litigation on present permit actions requiring our
review for compliance with EPA criteria. (Estimate
ocean dumping of dredge materials at rates 10 times
present annual rates.) The Corps has provided $6
million for the next three years for EPA to perform
field surveys to designate 15 of 127 dredged spill
disposal sites by the January, 1980 court deadline.
Given this context, the following provide the major
program priorities in FY 1980 and FY 1981.
o Because of the statutorily required termi-
nation of ocean dumping of harmful sewage
sludge as well as the termination of all
interim permits by the end of 1981, emphasis
on overseeing the implementation of alter-
native disposal practices must continue and
increase through 1981.
o A major continuing effort is to push interim
permittees into implementing acceptable
alternatives by the end of 1981. Alternative
methods of disposal of sewage sludge on land
or land utilization should become part of the
201 and 208 planning process, and those
responsible for 201 and 208 implementation
should be made aware of the land utilization/
land disposal alternatives which must be
considered as part of the required phcise-out
of sludge dumping by December 31, 1981.
o Review of applications for special permits
for ocean dumping should continue at present
or slightly higher levels.
o Critical review of dredged material permit
actions by the Corps of Engineers should
continue to receive major emphasis.
Activities; FY 80 and 81
o Act on interim and special permit applications.
o Review Corps of Engineers dredged material
permit/project applications.
-------
- 175 -
o Evaluate permittees' monitoring reports.
o Provide inputs to Headquarters for the annual
report on Ocean Dumping.
o Provide inputs to Headquarters for the annual
report to Congress and the Ocean Dumping
Convention.
o Refer emergency permit requests/situations to
Headquarters for action.
o Evaluate offshore industrial activities to
determine the need for special discharge
guidance or development of other pollution
control regulatory mechanisms, e.g.,
discharges from ocean thermal energy conversion
(OTEC) or discharges involving hypersalinity.
Particular attention should be given to
activities that may impact areas of special
sensitivity and/or concern. Necessary
actions should be initiated for the develop-
ment by Headquarters of any such needed
guidance.
o Participate in Department of Interior (DOI)
Regional Committees for inputs to outer
continental shelf (DCS) lease sales.
o Identify Regional R&D priorities related to
off-shore energy and other resource develop-
ment activities.
o Advice on marine sanctuaries: Respond to
requests from the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (as
specified in Title II of Marine Protection
Research and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) and from
other agencies for EPA advice on nominations
of sites for potential designation as marine
sanctuaries, and nominate sites for
designation as marine sanctuaries.
o Develop an inventory and data on sites for
potential inclusion in the national system of
sanctuaries and rank them in terms of
Regional/national priorities. This should be
coordinated with other concerned agencies
so that there is no duplication of effort.
-------
- 176 -
Water Quality Training
Priorities, FY 80 and 81
As a result of the reduction in training positions,
the Regional training function will be limited to
liaison and coordination between State and local
training programs and the National Training and
Technology Center (NTOTC). Only limited assistance
and support will be required by NTOTC in the conduct
of Section 205 program courses and for coordinating
EPA/State training needs assessments.
Activities; FY 80 and 81
Regional activities include coordination with State
and local agencies and assistance to NTOTC ori:
o Section 205 training programs
o Instructor training
o POTW operator training programs
o Section 109(b) State training program
development
o Delivery of NTOTC and other available ™
training courses
o Instructional Resources Center Services needs
o Assistance to States in development of
State Joint Training Coordinating Committees
o Assessments of EPA/State training needs
Secondary Treatment Modification for Marine Discharge
Section 301 (h) of the Clean Water Act established a
provision which allows the Administrator to modify
secondary treatment requirements on a case-by-case
basis for POTWs which discharge into marine waters
and which meet other stringent criteria. The
modification is provided through revision to the
effluent requirements established in an NPDES permit.
Applications for a modified permit will be reviewed »
by a task force composed of staff from the R&D
Corvallis Laboratory (Marine Division), and other
marine biological experts from NOAA, supplemented by
-------
- 177 -
contractor support. Headquarters will be responsible
for technical review of applications. Following
preparation of tentative determinations on each
application/ Regional EPA staff will be responsible
for carrying out all the permit issuance activities,
including such things as public notices, public
hearings, and maintenance of records associated with
the issuance of modified permits.
Water Quality Management
Priorities; FY 80
The Regional Water Quality Management and Standards
Program emphasizes the implementation and overview
of local water quality management, grants management,
and institutional controls. Regional priorities
include the following:
Management
o Develop fully the WQM portions of the FY 81
State/EPA Agreements. These Agreements
will cover not only the Water Quality
Programs, but also the Solid Waste and
Drinking Water Programs. Work with the
States to ensure development of adequate
five-year strategies, water quality problem
assessments, and FY 81 work plans.
o Ensure more effective Statewide management
and coordination of planning and implementa-
tion. States are ultimately responsible for
Statewide planning.
o Improve financial and fiscal planning com-
ponents of the WQM work programs and plans,
and work with State and local officials in
overcoming financial barriers to imple-
mentation.
o Participate actively and continuously in the
management of FY 79-funded WQM planning
projects of designated State and areawide
agencies. Specifically, Regional staff must
aggressively manage identified national
priority projects concerning urban storm
runoff, agricultural runoff, advanced waste
treatment, groundwater, and other priority
public health and environmental problems
identified in SEAs.
-------
- 178 -
o Ensure that each State Rural Clean Water
Program (RCWP) Committee oversees imple-
mentation of cost-sharing of approved
agricultural BMPs.
o Provide for, encourage, and assist public
participation in the above priorities
consistent with 40 CFR, Part 25 and 35.
106 Grants
o Work with the States to develop adequate
emergency authority and to ensure adequate
progress in developing contingency plans,
and to draft legislation for contingency
funds for environmental emergencies under
Section 504 in FY 80.
o Award grants to States from 106 allotments
based on demonstrated needs determined in the
negotiation of the State/EPA Agreement.
Use general State allotments as targets.
o Ensure that funds which become available as
a result of 205 Cg) delegations are repro-
grammed into high priority activities
identified in SEAs , especially hazardous
and toxic materials, monitoring and spill
prevention, implementation of WQM plans,
and support to State compliance and enforce-
ment activities.
208 Grants
o Grants in FY 80 are intended solely for
development of nonpoint source control pro-
grams with principal emphasis on agricultural
runoff, construction runoff, groundwater
septic regulation, noncoal mining, and
silviculture .
o Promptly approve, as appropriate, certified
portions of State or areawide WQM plans
addressing agricultural pollution so that
the control measures (BMPs) identified can
be eligible for cost-sharing under the
RCWP (208 (j)) administed by USDA.
o Continue to provide for, encourage and assist
public participation in WQM.
-------
- 179 -
Clean Lakes Grants
o Assist States in implementing the Section 304
program regulations and developing complete,
technically sound Clean Lakes grant proposals
o Provide optimum grants administration to
awarded grants to ensure projects are being
conducted according to approved grant agree-
ments and attached grant conditions, thereby
ensuring the Agency is not mismanaging the
millions of dollars attached to the Clean
Lakes Program.
Activities; FY 80
Management
o Work with the States to ensure that WQM
activities under Sections 106, 208, 314 and
206 (g) are integrated in the State/EPA
Agreements for FY 80. These Agreements will
cover not only the Water Quality Program,
but also the Solid Waste and Drinking Water
Programs. Encourage the States to develop a
single consolidated work plan.
o Review and provide comments on early drafts of
State/EPA Agreements and annual work plans to
ensure the final agreements are complete and
that they correctly include the regulatory
requirements of the Clean Lakes Program for
those States wishing to participate. This
is particularly important because of the
requirement that all States that wish to
participate must have completed and submitted
to the Agency by January 1, 1982, a classifi-
cation of their significant, publicly-owned
freshwater lakes in need of pollution
protection or enhancement, along with a
priority listing of such actions.
o Ensure work programs for continuing funding
under Section 208 contain measurable outputs
leading to technically, politically, and
financially implementable solutions for
identified priority problems areas in the
State.
-------
- 180 -
o Consistent with SEAs, award early in the year
106 State and interstate program grants and
208 grants to successful agencies. Ensure
that 208 agencies lacking evidence of signi-
ficant implementation of initial plans do
not receive additional funds.
o Complete EPA review and approval requirements
for all initial plans.
o Provide continuing (including off-site)
technical assistance with respect to priority
problem activities, including fiscal manage-
ment aspects of planning and implementation.
o Provide continuing evaluation of Approved
Management Agency performance, particularly
those responsible for National priority
program areas and for implementation of
regulatory programs.
o Ensure effective public participation in
State and areawide agency activities con-
sistent with 40 CFR 25 and 35, Subpart G.
o Review all State-proposed revisions of WQS
for compliance with EPA regulations and
policy guidance.
o Approve or disapprove WQS revisions.
o Give special attention to working with States
still attempting to complete the previous
triennial review of WQS.
o With Headquarters and the States, select
State and areawide WQM agencies to conduct
AWT reviews and develop construction and
septic system NPS regulatory programs.
o Participate in the review of NPDES Permits,
AWT projects and Water Quality Management
Plans to ensure the achievement of, or
implementation of Water Quality Standards.
o Review 301 (h) waiver applications.
-------
- 181 -
106 Grants
o Evaluate accomplishments at mid-year and
end-of-year, and reallocate funds among
States and interstate agencies where
appropriate.
208 Grants
o With Headquarters, manage 15-20 demonstra-
tions of implementation of urban storm
runoff control programs in FY 80.
o With Headquarters, manage selected ground-
water protection/aquifer designation
demonstration projects.
o Manage: seven on-going Model Implementation
Programs (MIP) and initiate 12 to 15 new
MIPs.
Clean Lakes Grants
o Integrate Clean Lakes projects to the
greatest practicable extent with other EPA
and other Agency programs to maximize the
effectiveness of the limited amount of avail-
able resources. Particular attention should
be paid to the Model Implementation Program
(MIP) and the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program,
and many of the Office of Research and
Development demonstration activities to
improve existing nonpoint source pollution
detection and control technology.
o Receive and technically, as well as admini-
stratively, review Clean Lakes grant appli-
cations, and award or deny grants based on
funding recommendations from Headquarters
and other technical comments received.
Regions need to supply Headquarters a copy of
each proposal received after a grant number
is assigned by the Regional grants office.
Priority consideration should be given to
State lake classification proposals, then to
grant applications that will likely lead to
quick positive funding decisons, ordering
proposals for processing so that those which
will provide the greatest public benefit are
started through the funding decision process
-------
- 182 -
first. Those proposals which will likely
end in a non-award decision should be
processed last.
Assist Headquarters in tracking the process
of the Clean Lakes Program and provide input
to further improve program operations.
Compile and submit tc Headquarters (Criteria
and Standards Division) by October 1 of each
fiscal year, the resource needs by State and
project priority for lake restoration
requirements, as reflected in State/EPA
Agreements and work plans submitted to the
Regional Administrator pursuant to the
regulatory requirements.
Dredge and Fill
Priorities; FY 80
First Priority
o Assist States in the development of State 404
programs by providing information on appli-
cable Federal regulations, procedures, and
funding mechanisms; provide direct support
in terms of consultation on existing State
Dredge and Fill/wetlands programs, draft
legislation or regulations, and other program
development; provide information or testimony
before State legislative or executive bodies;
provide assistance to approved States in
starting up program operations by helping to
establish coordinating procedures, data
bases, advisory bodies or the like. These
actions should be coordinated with, and
assisted by, when possible, the Headquarters
404 staff.
o Review State 404 program submissions to ensure
that the statutory requirements of Section 404
(g, hf and j) and the regulatory requirements
of 40 CFR 122-4 are met. Document the review
and transmit the results of the evaluation
with recommendation for approval/denial to
Headquarters. Coordinate with, and seek
necessary assistance from, Headquarters.
-------
- 183 -
Review Environmental Impact Statements submitted
with the intent of seeking a 404 (r) exemption
from permitting. Participate in project planning,
environmental impact assessment, public hearings
and other activities with the objective of ensuring
that the factors and criteria of the 404(b)(1)
guidelines are adequately considered in environ-
mental assessment and project design and implemen-
tation. Review and document the degree to which
the 404(b)(l) guidelines are adequately considered
in the EIS, and provide recommendations to the
Regional Federal Activities staff on the environ-
mental merits of the project. As needed, seek
assistance from and coordinate with Headquarters.
Provide assistance to Regional General Counsel in
litigation involving Section 404 where EPA is the
defendant by providing supplementary analysis for
litigation reports, assisting with the preparation
of briefs, and providing other support necessary
for an effective government defense.
Assist the Water Quality Management Program in
the review of State regulatory programs and best
management practices submitted under Section 208
(b)(4). Review should emphasize both the internal
quality of the proposed program/BMPs and the
degree of consistency with State 404 programs.
Coordinate with Headquarters as appropriate.
Manage and coordinate the Federal agency review of
State 404 permits in accordance with 404 (j) and
the applicable portions of 40 CFR 122-4. Ensure
that the Federal review provides meaningful
information and comment to the States and that the
system is operated in such a manner as to preserve
the integrity of Federal agency responsibilities.
Review "major" Cor-ps and State permits and carry
out those actions necessary to a meaningful
evaluation and recommendation, such as site visits,
participation in public hearings, EIS review, and
consultation with appropriate agencies and organi-
zations. Coordinate, as needed, with Headquarters
on controversial and especially critical cases,
and solicit Headquarters assistance when appro-
priate.
-------
- 184 -
Second Priority
o Review "important" permits as described above for
"major" permits.
o Review Federal or State general permits as
described above for "major" permits, placing
special emphasis on the need to provide sufficient
data and analysis to make a meaningful assessment
of cumulative and aggregate environmental impact.
To the extent possible, participate with the Corps
Districts, and States in the development and
assessment of proposed general permits.
o Increase efforts in enforcement against unauthor-
ized dredge or fill activities or permit violations
by providing increased technical support of
administrative actions under Section 309 and/or
litigation by EPA enforcement attorneys and admin-
istrative actions/litigation by District Engineers
under Section 404 (s). Such support should include
site evaluation and technical assessments, record
development, preparation of action documents (e.g.
A.O.s, T.R.O.s), or other support. Coordinate
with, or seek assistance from, Headquarters as
appropriate.
o Conduct field inspections to ascertain the state
of compliance for permitted activities, to detect
unauthorized activities, and to evaluate cumulative
impacts of activities conducted under general
permits or 208(b)(4) BMPs. This activity will
normally be carried out in conjunction with EPA,
Corps, or State enforcement officers using land,
water, or aerial surveillance methods and involves
preplanning, field work, documentation, and ini-
tiation of follow-up action, as appropriate.
Third Priority
o Provide assistance to States in the development of
State 208 (b) (4) regulatory programs and best
management practices. Activities will be in
support of 208 program personnel who have the lead
in this area and in coordination with the Fish and
Wildlife Service which is mandated to provide tech-
nical assistance to States pursuant to Section
208 (i) .
-------
- 185 -
o Review "minor" permits and provide comments and
recommendations to the Corps or States.
o Review EISs submitted with a Section 404 or
Section 9/10 permit application or which involve
wetland resources or 404-type activities even
when no such permit is required. To the extent
feasible, participate in project planning,
environmental impact assessment, public hearings,
and other activities with the objective of
ensuring both compliance with 404(b)(1), when
applicable, compliance with the Wetlands Protection
and Floodplains Management Executive Orders, the
EPA Wetlands Policy, and other applicable EPA
policies.
o Working with Headquarters, identify needs in
terms of policy/technical guidance, research,
monitoring and evaluation, information and data
systems, and other program support areas and
develop plans for or take actions to address
these needs, soliciting Headquarters assistance
where needed.
o With Headquarters assistance, expand activities
involved with increasing the level of information
about the 404 program and the level of public
awareness and understanding of the value of the
aquatic resources, especially wetlands. Activi-
ties may include the development and dissemination
of materials for information, education, or
training; participation in public meetings such
as conferences and symposia; or conducting edu-
cational programs with schools or citizens groups.
o Participate in plan formulation, review, evaluation,
and comment on special area management plans under
the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), 208 area-
wide plans, and GREAT plans (under WRDA) or ad hoc
plans which deal with regional environmental
assessments and/or land use plans.
o As appropriate, exercise the EPA veto power of
Section 404 (c) in accordance with the procedures
of 40 CFR 231 and any supplemental guidance. This
would include pre-initiation site and record
-------
- 186 -
development, preparation of action documents,
support of public hearings, and support of
adjudicatory hearings (if held).
Review, evaluate, and comment on regulations,
guidelines, Executive Orders, and other policy
documents, research reports, and other studies.
Includes participating in and reviewing develop-
ment of new/revised regulations and guidance
published under Section 404. This may involve
the review of other regulations affecting 404
programs, such as EPA's Solid Waste Regulations,
NEPA regulations, and Section 402 Regulations, or
regulations and reports published by the Corps,
Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine
Fisheries Service, Coastal Zone Managment Agencies,
State Environmental Agencies, River Basin Agencies,
and others.
Activities; FY 80
Monitor awarded projects to ensure that milestones
are accomplished, time requirements are met, and
special grant conditions are handled properly,
particularly those involving Section 404 Dredge
and Fill permit requirements and those of State
Water Quality Standards. Those grants that are
monetarily large and have significant potential
for adverse environmental impact, such as dredging,
should be given priority attention. A copy of
quarterly reports required on all grants must be
submitted to Headquarters as they are received
by Regional project officers.
Complete on a quarterly basis a standardized coding
and reporting form for water quality and grants
administration data on each project, and input this
information or have it entered into the STORET and
GIGS systems. The water quality data will be
continually reviewed to assess the effectiveness
of the program and for preparing reports for admin-
istration officals to be used before Congress and
the public. Copies of the quarterly reports must
be sent to Headquarters on a quarterly basis for
this purpose.
-------
- 187 -
o Provide Headquarters a brief (approximately one
page) summary of each project on October 1 of
each fiscal year, describing the project status,
water quality impacts, and public benefits
derived in relationship to the costs incurred.
o Carry out 404 (c) "pre-designation" activities for
the advanced designation of areas subject to
EPA's authority under that section. This in-
cludes participation in plan formulation, review,
evaluation, and comment on plans which specify
particular areas subject to 404 (c) designation.
It may involve site visits, technical assess-
ments, interagency and inter-office coordination
within Regions or between Headquarters, and
participation in meetings and public hearings.
Region-Specific Guidance/404
Two specific problem areas which warrant extraordinary
attention because of anticipated future difficulities,
are:
Alaska, which is characterized by conflicting
public interests in a resource-rich, but relatively
little understood ecoregion. (Much research is
needed on the unique ecosystems, and special
policies/procedures may need to be developed to
deal with the unique and often large-scale problems
likely to be encountered.)
The arid Western States, where increasing compe-
tition for scarce water resources will require
greater involvement in State-Regional planning
and the development of special policies/procedures.
Effluent Standards and Guidelines
Priorities; FY 80
It is expected that 24 sets of toxic control effluent
regulations will be promulgated during FY 80. These
regulations will incorporate the "fundamentally different
factors" (PDF) variance clauses into BAT, BCT and NSPS
as a general provision of all regulations. Because of
the sensitive and highly complex nature of the regula-
tions and the supporting "record", Headquarters expects
-------
- 188 -
that the Regions will consult fully the Effluent Guide- ^
lines Division (EGD) on any FDF variance requests. All f
such requests, whether approved or disapproved by the
Regional Administrator, are to be forwarded to EGD for
concurrence prior to final action. Any FDF variance
thus submitted will be in writing and supported by
copies of all relevant data and information upon which
the decision was based.
BAT Regulations Public Hearings
o Encourage public participation at public hearings
in review of proposed effluent guidelines.
o Ensure that all data conform to the Agency's
Quality Assurance Policy and Management Plan
and are properly stored in STORET.
Water Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Priorities; FY 80
o Assess and solve multi-media, multi-source
problems e.g., waste disposal sites and related
ground and surface water problems, and ensure
that multi-media toxic chemical data are entered
into STORET.
o Review Advanced Waste Treatment (AWT) and
Advanced Secondary Treatment (AST) proposals,
and improved technical capabilities for conducting
and reviewing Wasteload Allocations (WLAs).
o Guide and direct State monitoring activities
within the framework of the Basic Water Monitoring
Program.
o Review Section 301(h) waiver applications for
technical accuracy.
o Coordinate Federal monitoring efforts.
Data Collection Support Priorities
Headquarters will expect significantly increased support
and assistance by all Regions in 1980 in the effluent
guidelines process.
-------
- 189 -
Headquarters generally expects continued, in some
cases expanded, assistance by Regional S&A Divisions
to conduct monitoring activities of various industrial
facilities or POTWs in support of vastly expanded data
gathering efforts. In this regard, the Regions can
expect requests for specific assistance in obtaining
data on sludge, waste, spill, and runoff from industrial
sites as well as POTWs, and general assistance and
advice on impacts of BAT and RCRA, monitoring problems,
technology issues and the like.
o Collect and analyze toxic chemical data to
support Sections 301, 302, 304, 306, 307(a)(l)
and (2), 307 (b) (1) and 405(d) of the Clean Water
Act of 1977 and the revised NRDC/EP Settlement
Agreement. These data will be used to develop
BAT, New Source Performance (NSP) and Pretreat-
ment Regulations, and BPWTT for POTWs, and to
develop programs for specific areas where control
more stringent than BAT is necessary.
o Improve the toxic chemical analytic capabilities
of the States.
o Develop the use of biological monitoring,
especially as a screening tool for toxic chemicals
and other problem identification.
o Maintain a minimum proficiency for conducting
toxic chemical laboratory analysis. This is
required to support the Agency's Quality
Assurance Policy and Management Plan.
o Collect and analyze priority pollutant samples
shown in Table 1 and store the resulting data in
STORET for use by the Monitoring an^ Data
Support Division (MDSD) for support of effluen-t
regulation development, and for conducting
exposure/risk studies, fate studies, and studies
to determine the instream effects of specific
effluent levels (dilution studies). For this
effort, the Region should recommend a monitoring
plan which includes sampling sites and schedules.
The Regions will be responsible for sample
collection, laboratory analysis, quality assurance,
data handling, data entry into STORET and progress
reports submitted bimonthly to Headquarters.
Headquarters will review the Regional toxic
monitoring plans, and may elect to collect addi-
tional samples for toxic chemical analysis under
contract.
-------
- 190 -
o Since the toxics chemical monitoring effort
will ultimately require State involvement (e.g.,
compliance monitoring, water quality-based
effluent limitations etc.), the Regions should
work with its States to develop a plan for
analyzing toxic chemicals, using any combination
of Regional, State, or contractual support.
Emphasis should be placed on improving the toxic
chemical analytic capabilities of those States
showing potential, and improving the proficiency
of those States which have fully developed their
capabilities, e.g., effort should be made to
ensure that all laboratories within a State
integrate sample analyses, where possible, to
meet multi-media needs.
Activities, FY 80
The Regional monitoring program will engage in the
following activities:
o Participate fully in the Agency's Quality
Assurance Policy and Management Plan. Parti-
cipation will be mandatory and each program
and laboratory should make the permanent
commitment of manpower necessary for this effort.
The Regions should also evaluate State, local,
and contractor laboratory quality assurance
performance and ensure that they conform to the
Agency's QA plan. Continuing emphasis must be
placed on acquiring technically sound and
legally-defensible data.
o Conduct problem assessments, including ground
water, surface water, and biological sampling,
at those hazardous waste disposal sites known
or suspected of posing a threat to public
health or sensitive aquatic ecosystems. Store
all data in STORET. These data will be used to
identify problem areas and will serve as a
basis for defining Water Quality Management
priorities and necessary remedial actions.
o Provide technical review of wasteload allocations
(WLA) and AWT/AST proposals. In FY 80, much more
attention will be placed on the adequacy of
monitoring activities conducted to support WLA
-------
- 191 -
and AWT/AST decisions. Since each Region
will be expected to review and concur with
wasteload allocations—including intensive
survey designs, monitoring or related data,
and modeling results—it is important that
the Region provide adequate capabilities in
this area.
o Oversee and guide State implementation of the
Basic Water Monitoring Program. Each Region
must evaluate State conformance with this
program and negotiate specific work plans
with the States through the State/EPA
Agreement process. Emphasis should be
placed on intensive surveys, especially for
multi-media problem assessments, biological
studies of specific ecosystems, and wasteload
allocations; operating the national ambient
monitoring station network under the Basic
Program; following EPA's quality assurance
program; entering data into STORET; and,
expanding the Section 305 (b) reports.
o Operate the STORET system and support States
storing data in STORET. To assist in this
effort, each Region should designate a
high level professional in a technical divison
as a STORET data base manager to be responsible
for the transfer of all Regional/State data,
including multi-media toxics data into STORET.
o Summarize and evaluate State Section 305 (b)
reports. Each Region should guide and assist
the States in preparing these reports and
transmit them to EPA Headquarters by
April 1, 1980.
o Review Section 301(h) waiver applications for
technical accuracy.
Region Specific Guidance
The Water Quality Monitoring Program requires the
following:
o Each Region is expected to include any Regional
output not presently identified in this
Guidance package. Examples include: preparing
special data reports and responding to
inquiries and requests from State and local
-------
- 192 -
governments; coordinating with other Federal
agencies; modeling activities to support
specific programs, etc.
Water Quality Enforcement
Regional Priorities and Activities; FY 80
I. Initiate enforcement actions in emergency
situations involving substantial threats to
public health and safety.
o Respond to extreme emergency situations
under Section 504.
II. Conclude all enforcement actions involving major
source enforcement effort cases, including
municipalities and Federal facilities.
o Work with the respective U.S. Attorney
conducting technical and legal activities
necessary to resolve all pending referrals,
including municipal and Federal facilities.
III. Enforce against violators of the Clean Water and
Ocean Dumping Acts (other than MSEE).
o Conduct pre-enforcement evaluations of self-
monitoring reports from permittees for whom
EPA has primacy.
o Conduct an enforcement evaluation (technical)
of self-monitoring reports from permittees
for whom EPA has primacy.
o Conduct sampling inspections of major
permittees.
o Conduct compliance evaluation inspections of
major permittees (see PPA 5&6 explanation,
following Enforcement PPA list).
o Issue administrative orders and notices of
violations to violators of National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits.
o Refer and follow-up NPDES cases .
o Assess civil penalties against significant
ocean dumping and SPCC violations.
o Take enforcement actions against oil spill
cases,
-------
- 193 -
o Prepare NPDES quarterly noncompliance
reports.
o Maintain and improve Regional ADP systems
to support tracking of compliance with the
NPDES program).
o Monitor and enforce Section 404 violations,
minimally.
o Re-evaluate and if necessary, rewrite existing
Memoranda of Agreement to reflect changes in
NPDES regulations.
IV. Expand toxics and hazardous substances control
programs.
o Begin implementation of the toxics compliance/
enforcement program.
o Conduct compliance sampling inspections using
bioassay screening for toxic substances.
o Conduct compliance sampling inspections for
toxic substances for secondary permittees.
o Begin the pretreatment monitoring program.
o Implement the pretreatment monitoring program.
o Take enforcement actions against violators of
hazardous substances regulations.
V. Implement the Municipal Policy and Strategy.
o Implement designated phases of the municipal
policy and strategy; coordinate with States
and Headquarters in carrying out the strategy.
PCS/GIGS interface.
VI. Improve enforcement methods.
o Conduct audits and/or overview of NPDES
States, including review of States NPDES
quarterly noncompliance reports.
o Update the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR)
quality assurance program (see PPA 11
explanation, following Enforcement PPA list).
-------
- 194 -
o Implement updated Enforcement Management "
System (EMS) procedures.
o Coordinate with Headquarters re-evaluation
of existing compliance monitoring and
enforcement programs (continuous compliance
effort).
o Implement enforcement strategies for
specified categories (i.e., electric utilities,
iron & steel/ etc.).
o Load permit limitation data for Compliance
Assurance System (CAS), beginning in early
part of FY 80; loading of DMR parametric
data will follow upon the completion of the
loading of the permit data; the automatic
violation detection capability of CAS will
be operational in FY 1981.
o Assure States CAS data quality.
o Assist/overview NPDES States implementation
Of EMS.
-------
- 195 -
Water Enforcement - Permits Issuance
Regional Priorities and Activities; FY 80
Permits Issuance Program will focus on the development
and implementation of toxic controls through the second-
round permit effort and the pretreatment effort, reissuing
major municipal permits in accordance with the National
Municipal Strategy, and on streamlining the permit pro-
cess through the initiation of the Permits Consolidation
effort. Priority activities are broken down as follows:
o Reissue Major Industrial Permits - One of the
more resource intensive activities in FY 1980
will be the introduction of BAT/toxic controls
in industrial NPDES permits. As the BAT/toxic
guidelines are promulgated towards the end of
FY 1979 and the early part of FY 1980, Regional
Permits Program personnel will be required to
incorporate these revised limitations into
existing NPDES permits. In addition, where BAT
controls are not promulgated (largely for
"secondary" industries), the Permit program will
be responsib?.<3 for developing toxic limitations
for these sources based on best engineering
judgement (BEJ). This is a very time and
resource-consuming process.
o Reissue Major Municipal Permits - The National
Municipal Policy published in FY 1979 sets forth
the priorities for issuing expiring major
municipal permits. This policy, developed by an
Agency-wide task force, requires that reissued
municipal permits incorporate the results of
301(i) determinations which allow POTWs an
extended compliance schedule for installing
secondary treatment. In addition, the Policy
dictates that reissued major municipal permits
include the requirement to develop a pretreatment
program where appropriate. The incorporation of
these two requirements will entail increased
resources over those needed in previous years to
reissue major municipal permits.
o Permit Consolidation - FY 1980 will witness the
development of consolidated permit-writing units
in the Regional offices. These permit-writing
organizations will contain positions for permit
-------
196
drafting, paper flow, and an initial point of
contact for issuing consolidated permit
relating to the NPDES, Hazardous Waste,
Underground Injection Control, Ocean Dumping,
New Source, and other permit-like programs.
In addition, the first consolidated NPDES-RCRA
permits should be issued by the Regional offices
in FY 1980,
Pretreatment Program Approval - In FY 1980,
considerable Regional resources must be devoted
to reviewing and approving or denying requests
for local pretreatment program approval. In the
24 States which have not received NPDES approval,
EPA will be responsible for making an initial
determination on the requests for State pre-
treatment program approval, and forwarding
recommendations to Headquarters for the Admini-
strator's final determination.
Overview State Programs - Regional resources
devoted to overviewing "approved NPDES State
programs will remain fairly constant from FY 1979
to FY 1980. In FY 1980, it is anticipated that
three additional States will receive NPDES
approval. Studies conducted by the Headquarters
and Regional offices have determined that dele-
gation of State programs will reduce Regional
office resources a base level beyond which
no further resource reduction is possible. In
the NPDES program, we have witnessed a general
reduction of Permit Program resources from a
high of 490 positions in FY 1974 to the FY 1980
level of 237 positions. This reduction in permit
issuance resources is largely attributable to
the delegation of State NPDES programs. As work
load analyses indicate, however, a base level of
Regional personnel must be maintained to insure
sufficient overview of State programs. This base
level amounts to approximately 162 Regional posi-
tions nationwide. As most Regions are currently
functioning at this base level, increased re-
ductions due to State delegations are not antici-
pated. In addition, the nature of the State
programs to be overviewed becomes increasingly
complex as additional programs, such as RCRA,
UIC, and 404 are assumed by the States,, As
these State programs become more complicated,
the task of the Regional personnel in overviewing
the State programs similarly becomes more
difficult and resource intensive.
-------
- 197 -
o Conduct Adjudicatory Hearings - In order to
clear the way for the new enforcement initiatives
envisioned by the FY 1980/1981 Office of Enforce-
ment priorities, it will be necessary for Regional
offices to address as many high priority adjudi-
catory hearings as possible. Enforcement pro-
ceedings are stayed pending the resolution of
such hearings.
In addition to the above enumerated priorities, the
Regional Offices should, where resources permit, continue
other significant, yet lower priority, activities such
as review of Dredge and Fill permits; issuance of New
Source permits, based on New Source Performance Standards;
and development of preliminary determinations on requests
for 301 (c) and (g) economic and water quality variances,
316 thermal variances, and fundamentally different
factors variances.
Region Specific Guidance
While the Regional Offices should generally follow the
priorities set forth in the previous sections, the
order of priority may change from Region to Region. The
top priorities set forth in this guidance may not be
resource intensive for some Regions, and thus they may
wish to devote resources to other activities because of
the importance of the activity within the Region. For
example, certain 316 requests for variance may be
sufficiently beneficial to the environment to justify
Regional resource expenditures. The following Regions
should ensure that significant priority is given to the
listed activities:
o Region I - Particular attention should be given
to 301(h) marine waivers in Region I. The
Region should ensure that resources are available
to incorporate the results of 301(h) determina-
tions into NPDES permits. In addition, the
Region should devote considerable attention to
ensuring that POTWs in Massachusetts develop
pretreatment programs where appropriate as the
Regional Office will be primarily responsible
for overseeing the implementation of the pre-
treatment effort in this State, since it has
not yet received its NPDES delegation.
Massachusetts is anticipated to have a signi-
ficant number of industrial users subject to
Federal pretreatment standards. Region I should
similarly focus on ensuring that second round
permits with BAT/toxic controls are issued to
industrial sources in Massachusetts.
-------
- 198 -
o Region Ii - Region II should focus special
attention on ensuring that pretreatment programs
are developed by appropriate POTWs in the State
of New Jersey. New Jersey is expected to have
large numbers of indirect dischargers subject
to pretreatment requirements and since the State
has not received NPDES delegation, the Regional
Office will be responsible for ensuring that
such standards are complied with by industrial
users and that appropriate POTWs are required
to develop programs to control the discharge
of pollutants by these industrial users. In
addition, Region II should place priority on
issuing direct discharge BAT/toxic permits in
the State of New Jersey, Finally, Region II
has the largest number of outstanding adjudi-
catory hearings to address. Priority should
be given to resolving these hearings.
o Region III - Region III should ensure that
resources are provided to work with the Regional
404 (Dredge and Fill Program) Office in assisting
States to develop 404 programs. Regional NPDES
personnel are particularly capable of providing
this type of assistance since the 404 State
program requirements are virtually identical in
most cases to the 402 NPDES State program re-
quirements .
° Region IV - Region IV, like Region III, has a
significant number of wetland areas and should
work with the Regional 404 Office in ensuring
that State 404 programs are efficiently and
effectively developed. In addition, Region IV
should give high priority to issuing second
round BAT/toxic permits to those sources for
which it is responsible., This Region has the
largest workload of EPA issued BAT/toxic permits.,
o Region V - Since the States in Region V have all
received NPDES approval,, priority in this Region
should be given to approving State pretreatment
programs where appropriate, and overviewing
State programs.
-------
- 199 -
Region VI - As none of the States in Region VI
have received NPDES delegation, Region VI
activities should focus on issuing BAT/toxic
permits to industrial sources in these States
and ensuring that appropriate POTWs in these
States develop pretreatment programs. In
addition, because of the significant number of
wetland areas in Region VI, the Permits in
this Region should work with the 404 program
office to ensure that the Region VI States
develop efficient and effective 404 State
programs.
Regions IX and X - As both of these Regions
have jurisdiction over large coastal areas,
their priorities are similar. Regions IX and
X should ensure that resources are available
to incorporate the results of Section 301(h)
marine variance determinations into NPDES
permits. In addition, the Permits personnel
in both Regions should work with the Regional
404 program offices in ensuring that the States
in these Regions develop efficient and effective
404 State programs.
-------
- 200 -
PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS
B230 - MUNICIPAL WASTE TREATMENT FACILITY CONSTRUCTION
The following set of PPA's are to be included in the
operating plan to be submitted by the Regions. Final
determinations on whether the PPA will be an output
commitment or an activity indicator will be made at a
later date. (Further PPAs may be required for FY 1980
related to delegation progress, and will be included by
separate memorandum.)
(Construction Grants PPAs)
1. Gross dollar obligations. This is a cumulative
quarterly estimate for FY 1980 of the gross rate of
obligations by State excluding P.L. 84-660 and 206(a)
reimbursable fund.
2. Gross dollar deobligations. This is a cumulative
quarterly estimate for FY 1980 of the deobligations
made to prior grants during the year, excluding
deobligations from Section 206(a) awards.
3. Number of new awards by step. This is a cumulative
quarterly estimate for FY 1980 of the number of new
awards (excluding amendments) by State by step.
4. Number of completions by step. This is a cumulative
quarterly estimate for FY 1980 of the number of
completions by State by step.
5. Outlays. This is a cumulative monthly estimate for FY
1980 of the dollar amount of outlays by State.
6. Number of new step 1 awards which have had an individual,
or joint, preapplication conference. This is a
cumulative quarterly estimate for FY 1980 by State, of
the number of new step 1 awards for which individual,
or joint, preapplication conferences have been held
prior to or immediately after the award of the Step 1
grant.
-------
- 201 -
7. Number of step 1 completions which have had midcourse
facility planning meetings. This is a cumulative
quarterly estimate for FY 1980 by State, of the
number of step 1 completions for which midcourse
facility meetings have been held.,
8. Date five-year priority list is accepted by EPA and
input into the GIGS system. This is the estimated
date for FY 1980 by State, when a priority list
(meeting all regulatory requirements under section
35.915 and section 39.915-1 and policy guidance under
PRM #78-13) is accepted and input into GIGS.
9. Number of EISs initiated, related to construction
grants project. This is a cumulative estimate for FY
1980 by State, of the number of environmental impact
statements (EIS) related to construction grants
projects that were required by issuance of a "notice
of intent" during the period.
10. Number of new step 1 awards with "full scale public
participation programs." This is a cumulative
quarterly estimate for FY 1980 by State, of the
number of Step 1 awards for which a "Full Scale
Public Participation Program", as defined in section
35.917-5(e) of the proposed regulations on Public
Participation, will be initiated.
11. Percent and dollar amount of new step 1, 2, 3 dollars
awarded to minority business enterprise (MBEs).
This is a cumulative quarterly estimate for FY 1980
by Region, of the percent of A/E and construction
contract dollars awarded to MBEs.,
12. Date for awarding construction management assistance
grant to State. This is the estimated date for FY
1980 when each State (where applicable) will sign
a Construction Management Assistance Grant (CMAG)
Agreement with EPA.
13. Number of work-years oif Corps of Engineers personnel
under the step 3 management agreement. This is
the workyear estimate for FY 1980 by State, of
-------
- 202 -
the number of workyears of Corps of Engineers employees
involved in the EPA construction grants program under
the step 3 management IAG.
14. Dollar value of the innovative/alternative technology
used in construction grants projects. This is the
dollar estimate for FY 1980 by State of the eligible
cost of the innovative or alternative portion of
construction grants projects qualifying for the 2%
set-aside under section 35.915-l(b).
15. Dollar value of small community projects using
altenative technology. This is a dollar estimate for
FY 1980 by State of the total eligible cost of small
community projects using innovative or alternative
technologies, which qualify for the 4% set-aside
under section 35.915-l(e).
16. Number of AWT projects reviewed and the number of
these plans changed because of review. This is an
annual estimate for FY 1980.
17. Number of facility plans reviewed which include
Innovative and Alternative technology. This is an
annual estimate for FY 1980.
(Operations & Maintenance PPAs)
18. Number 1 Step 1 and Step 2 projects receiving operational
reviews. This is an annual estimate for FY 1980
by Region of facility plans and P&S operational reviews
intended to remove unneeded upgrade projects from
State priority lists and to identify major influent
control and design deficiency problems for grantee
correction before final grant payment.
19. Number of projects receiving strict operations
checklist application. This is a quarterly estimate
for FY 1980 by Region of major projects and selected
minor projects to which the operations checklist will
be applied.
-------
- 203 -
20. Number of Step 3 grant awards conditioned on timely
completion of approved plan of operation schedules.
This is an annual estimate for FY 1980 by Region
of projects for which plan of operation schedules
will be strictly enforced.
21. Number of Step 3 grants awarded with separately
identified start-up service subagreements. This
is an annual estimate for FY 1980 by Region.
22. Number of O&M inspections of new and upgraded
Federally-funded treatment plants. This is a
cumulative quarterly estimate for FY 1980 by State of
the number of O&M inspections of each new or upgraded
plant conducted by EPA Regions or States before Step
3 close-out; also, approximately one year after
start-up, and documented on a completed EPA Form
#7500-5. Actual inspections are to be identified
by project number for input to the O&M Data system.
23. Number of O&M inspections of existing plants.
This is a cumulative quarterly estimate for FY 1980
by State of the number of O&M inspections of each
existing plant conducted by the State and reported on
EPA Form #7500-5. EPA accompanies the States on 15
percent or more of these inspections. (One-third of
each State's operating POTWs are to receive such an
inspection each year.) Actual inspections are
identified in the O&M Data System by project number.
24. Number of problem plant follow-up inspections. This
is a cumulative quarterly estimate for FY 1980 by
Region of the number of State or EPA Region inspections
on existing plants with known operationl problems
(identified through prior inspections, review of
operating records, or referral from other sources)
to verify corrective action previously required
or to specify probable causes of the problems.
The actual number of inspections will be reported
manually through the Formal Reporting System.
-------
- 204 -
25. Number of POTWs brought into compliance through
coordinated enforcement and assistance actions. This
is a cumulative quarterly estimate for FY 1980 by
Region of the number of on-site assistance projects
(by private contract, States, or EPA and coordinated
with enforcement), which will yield reliable compliance
with NPDES permit effluent limits.
B212 - Spill Prevention and Response
1. Number of spills into inland waters of the U.S. at
which a qualified EPA On-Scene Coordinator (OSC) was
present on-scene to direct removal mitigation actions:
Oil spills
Hazardous subtances spills
Other environmental emergencies
(not included above)
2. Number of spills into inland waters of the U.S. at
which a qualified EPA OSC was present on-scene to
monitor removal/ mitigation actions:
Oil spills
Hazardous substances spills
Other environmental emergencies
(not included above)
3. Number of responses by a qualified OSC, for which his
presence was not required, but for which resources(s)
were expended (e.g., telephone monitoring, coordination,
State actions, environmental response team (ERT)
on-scene, etc.)
4. Number of spill prevention inspections of all types
conducted by Regional staff technical assistance team
(TAT), or ERT personnel at non-transportation related
facilities.
5. Number of workyears of technical assistance provided
to States for training field personnel in responding
to environmental emergencies.
6. Number of Federal Disaster Assistance Administrator
mission assignments to assist or provide technical
support in a Federally declared disaster to which EPA
responded.
-------
- 205 -
Water Quality Training
o Completed State assessments of Section 205
program related training needs.
o Number of State Agency personnel training in
Section 205 curricula.
o State assessment of POTW training needs.
o Number of POTW personnel receiving training. .
total and at Section 109(b) training centers.
o Number of States with:
Completed 109 (b) training centers
Operator Training Coordinating Committees
o Number of Direct Training courses and trainees
-------
- 206 -
B203 - WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT - SECTION 208/106
(Reporting Requirement: SL-Start Level; M-Monthly; Q-Quarterly;
3A-3emi-Annually; A-Annually; R-Regional only;
S-by-S - State-by-State)
1. Number of FY 1981 State/EPA Agreements concluded. (SL, M,
S-by-S)
2. Number 208 planning grants awarded covering AWT Planning.
(SL, A, R)
3. Amount of 208 funds obligated for planning covering AWT
Planning. (SL,A, R)
4. Number of 208 planning grants awarded covering Otner
Facilities Planning (SL, A, R)
5. Amount of 208 funds obligated for planning covering Other
Facilities Planning (3L, A, R)
6. Number of 208 planning grants awarded covering Septics (SL,
A, R)
7. Amount of 208 funds obligated for planning covering Septics
(SL, A, R)
8. Number 208 planning grants awarded covering Urban Runoff
(SL, Q, R)
9. Amount of 208 funds obligated for planning covering Urban
Runoff (SL, Q, R)
10. Number of 208 planning grants awarded covering Construction
Runoff (SL, Q,R)
11. Amount of 208 funds obligated for planning covering Construc-
tion Runoff (SL, Q, R)
12. Number 208 planning grants awarded covering Agriculture NP3
(SL, Q, R)
13. Amount of 208 funds obligated for planning covering Agriculture
NPS (SL, Q, R)
-------
- 207 -
14. Number of 208 planning grants awarded covering other NFS
(SL, Q, R)
15. Amount of 208 funds obligated for planning covering other NFS
(SL, Q, R)
16. Number of 208 planning grants awarded covering Groundwater
(SL,Q, R)
17. Amount of 208 funds obligated for planning covering Groundwater
(SL, Q, R)
18. Number of State agencies funded for FY 1980 under a consolidated
105/208/314 work plan (SL, Q, R)
19. Number of FY 1980 State 106 programs approved (SL, Q, R)
20. Number of FY 1981 State 106 programs approved (A, R)
21. Amount of FY 1980 State 106 funds obligated (SL, Q, R)
22. Increase, FY 1980 over FY 1979, in State 106 funds committed
in approved or amended State programs for implementation of
NFS controls under approved 208 plans or parts of plans.
(SL, Q, R)
23. Decrease, FY 1980 vs. FY 1979, in State 106 funds committed
in approved or amended State programs for support of Construction
Grants Program Management. (SL, Q, R)
24. Number of 208 planning outputs (recommended pollution control
measures) approved by EPA for national priority problem cate-
gories (AWT, septics, urban storm runoff, construction runoff,
and agriculture, groundwater, mining, and silviculture NFS)
(SL, SA, R)
25. Number of 208 planning outputs approved by EPA for other
than national priority problem categorties.
26. Number of tfaste Load Allocations approved as an output of
208 planning (SL, SA, R)
27. Number of population projections approved as an output of
208 planning (SL, SA, R)
-------
- 208 -
28. Number of WQM plans (as defined in Section 35.1521) certified
and approved within 150 days of submission (Q, 3-by-S).
29. Number of EPA approved designated management agencies imple-
menting approved plans or parts of plans for control of national
oriority problem categories (AWT, septics, urban storm runof,
construction runoff, and agriculture, groundwater, raining, and
silviculture NFS) (SL, SA, R)
30. dumber of EPA approved designated management agencies implemen-
ting approved plans or parts of plans for control of other
problem categories (SL, S, R)
31. Number of Regional person years for designated management
agency oversight (SA, R) .
32. Number of Regional person years for all other WQM program
mangement (208/106). (SA, R)
-------
- 209 -
B253 - Ocean Disposal and Permits
1. Number of interim permit applications acted upon.
2. Number of special permit applications acted upon.
3. Number of implementation schedules of interim
permittees monitored.
4. Number of Corps of Engineers dredged material permit/
project applications reviewed.
5. Number of offshore industrial activities evaluated.
6. Number of sanctuary sites identified.
7. Number of sanctuary sites studied.
(Reporting Requirements: SL-Start Level; M-Monthly;
Q-Quarterly; SA-Semi-Annually; A-Annually; R-Regional
only; S-by-S - State-by-State)
B244 - Clean Lakes
1. Number of State/EPA Agreements and work plans reviewed and
commented on.
2. Number of State lakes classification grants awarded
3. Number of State lakes grant applications processed for award.
4. Number of clean lakes grant aplications processed for non-award.
5. Number of clean lakes projects completed.
6. Number of quarterly progress reports received, reviewed and
approved.
7.. Number of standardized 3TORET and GIC3 reporting forms completed
and the information put in the computer systems.
-------
- 210 -
B209 - Dredge and Fill
(Reoorting Requirement: SL-Start level; M-Monthly; Q-Quarterly;
R-Regional only; and 3-State only)
1. Major Permit Review. Review, evaluation, comment on, and
other actions related to the processing of major federal or
state individual Section 404 and/or Section 9/10 permit appli-
cations. May include site visits and participation in hearings.
Major permits are deemed to constitute 14% of total individual
permits based upon the average over 10 regions of the categori-
cal breakdown using the criteria established in FY '79 (see
attachment). The actual work element for PPAs 1-3 is public
notices received. (SL-M-R)
2. Important Permit Review. As in 1, for important permits
established as 51% of all individual permits. Less likely to
involve site visits or hearings. (SL-M-R)
3. Minor Permit Review. As in 1, for minor permits established
as 35% of allIndividual permits. Will not normally involve
site visits or hearings. (SL-M-R)
4. 404(c) Actions. Activities concerning exercise of the EPA
"veto" power of Section 404(c). Pre-initiation site and
record evaluation, initiation of action, additional site
evaluation, record development, preparation of action documents,
support of public hearing, and support of adjudicatory hearing
(if held). "(M-R)
5. General Permit Review. Review, evaluation, comment on and
other actions related to the processing of federal or state
general Section 404 permits. (Q-R)
6. Enforcement Support Activities in support of EPA or Corps of
Engineers enforcement actions with regard to either noncompliance
with permit conditions or unauthorized activities (non-permitted).
May involve site evaluation, record development, preparation
of action documents, and support of administrative actions
under Section 309 and/or litigation by Office of Enforcement,
the Corps, or the Department of Justice. (Q-R)
-------
- 211 -
7. Compliance Monitoring. Field inspections to ascertain state
of compliance for permitted activities, to detect unauthorized
activities, and to evaluate cumulative impacts of activities
conducted under general permits or 208(b)(4) BMPs. Will
normallv be carried out in conjunction with EPA or Corps
enforcement officers using land, water, or aerial surveillance
methods. Pricing includes preplanning, field work, documenta-
tion, and initiation of follow-up action if (any). (Q-R)
8. State 404 Program Transfer Assistance. All activities involved
with transfer to qualified states of the 404 program including
pre-submittal consultation and assistance, review of program
submissions, documentation of findings and recommendations,
coordination with headquarters and other agencies, assistance
with needed revisions, and assistance in early phases of program
operation. (Q-R)
9- State 208(b)(4) Program Transfer Assistance. As in 8, with
regard to State 208('o)(4) regulatory programs plus the review
of State-submitted Best Management Practices for classes and
categories of appropriate activities. Activities here will
be in support of 208 program personnnel who have the lead in
this area and in coordination with the Fish and Wildlife
Service which is mandated to provide technical assistance to
States pursuant to Section 208(i). (SL-Q-S)
10. EIS Review - non-404(r). Pre-planning oarticipation, review,
and comment on environmental impact assessments, statements,
and related documents submitted along with a 404 and or Section
9/10 permit application or which involve wetland resources or
404-type activities even when no such permit is required. Does
not include EIS 's submitted with the intent of seeking a 404(r)
exemption for major federal projects. May involve participation
in public hearings anc< litigation. (SL-Q-R)
11. FIS Review - 404(r). As in ]0( exceot for those EIS's submitted
with the intent "of seek-.ng 3 404(r) exemption from permitting.
The scopeP complexity controversy, and political interest
inherent in these major congressionally-authorized projects is
much greater than for other projects and a commensurately higher
level of resources Is 'required to adequately evaluate and
document the degree to whjer the EIS adequately considers the
factors and criteria of the 40^(b) environmental guidelines.
Includes coordination with headquarters, CEQ, and other agencies,
(SL-Q-R)
-------
12. CZM Plan Review. Particioation in plan formulation, review,
evaluation of, and comment on State Plans under the Coastal
Zone Management Act and the Special Area Management Plans
which soecify the detailed land use Plans for particular
coastal areas. Objectives include assisting with planning
for the wise use of aquatic resources and ensuring that the
Plans comply with Clean T^ater Act provisions in accordance
with the consistency mandate of Section 307(f) of the CZMA.
Participation in public hearings and litigation (if any).
(SL-Q-3)
13. Administrative and Program^ Management and Overhead. All other
activities at the regional level necessary for the effective
operation of the 404 Program, including:
° administration - supervision, personnel action, contracting,
budget preparation and funds management, recruiting, training,
etc.
0 technical review and comment on regulations and other policy
documents, research reports, and other studies,
0 review of 208 and other regional plans not covered above
0 coordination with/assistance to the Fish and Wildlife Service's •
National Wetlands Inventory.
° development of regional guidelines or supplements to
national regulations/policies
° public information and education
0 general coordination with headquarters, the Corps of Engineers,
NOAA, States, Interstate and River Sasin agencies, and others.
(Not applicable as reportable requirement)
3303-Water Enforcement
PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS DEFINITIONS
4
(PPVs which have not been defined are considered to be self-expla-
natory - the numbers refer to PPA's for FY 1980)
The term "compliance monitoring" is a generic term meant to
cover all activities taken to ascertain a discharger's compliance
status. This includes, but is not limited to, compliance inspec-
tions -- NPDES Compliance Evaluation Inspections and NPDE3 Sampling
Inspections, and compliance review -- the review of discharge
monitoring reports and compliance schedule reports. The main
function of NPOES compliance inspections is to verify self-monitor- M
-------
- 213 -
ing information and develop the basis for possible follow-up
enforcement action. "Compliance monitoring" may also include
aerial monitoring and special site visits for other non-NPDES
enforcement purposes but compliance monitoring resources have
not been provided to support these efforts. All inspection
activity is to be conducted on the premise that it may lead to
enforcement action.
PPA 1+2. Pre-enforcement evaluation is the initial evaluation
of compliance information to arrange the noncomplying sources in
sequence for subsequent enforcement review. This is essentially a
routine process for the preliminary screening an3 prioritizing of
noncompliance within an established procedural framework.
Techical enforcement evaluation takes place following the
pre-enforcement evaluation. It is a substantive, technical eval-
uation of noncompliance identified as other than routine violations.
This evaluation is done to determine the appropriate level of
enforcement action to be taken.
PPA 3-5. A visit to a facility for compliance inspection
is to be counted in only one of the categories listed. Thus, a
single visit cannot be counted as a compliance evaluation inpsection
as well as a sampling inspection. It must be one or the other.
PPft 3+4. Sampling Inspections are inspections at which
representative composite sample (s) of a permittee's effluent is
collected and analyzed to verify the accuracy of the Permittee's
discharge monitoring reports. This activity also includes the same
objectives as a compliance evaluation inspection, and where appro-
priate, mav serve to gather detailed information for the possible
institution of legal action against the permittee. However, credit
is to be given to only one type of inspection. In this case
it would be Eor a sampling inspection. We recognize that sampling
inspect ions are considerably more resource intensive than compliance
evaluation inspections.
A "representative composite sample" consists of a series of
aliquots or discrete samples collected during the course of an
operating day, collected at the location specified in the permit or
appropriate representative location chosen by the inspector, and
appropriately weighed for variations in flow and/or concentration to
be representative of the effluent discharged during the sampling
period.
A grab sample may be taken to satisfy this definition only in
those situations when the inspector has sufficient knowledge of the
manufacturing process and wastewater treatment facility to ensure
that a grab sample will be representative of the permittee1s discharge
-------
*,
A FY 80 priority will be given to the utilization of sampling
resources more directly in support of enforcement needs. That is,
case development and followup in support of the major source enforce-
ment drive will receive first priority. In allocating resources,
the next highest priority will be given to ensuring that municipal
permittees operating under 301(i) extensions are achieving full
compliance with their extensions schedules. Finally, remaining
sampling resources should be allocated to ensure the continued
compliance of major permitees with 3PT or secondary limitations.
It is expected that every major Permittee meeting statutory
effluent limitations should be sampled annually, by either EPA
or the State. Priority will be given to sampling permittees achiev-
ing statutory effluent limits and for verification for continued
compliance with statutory effluents limits once achieved.
A sampling inspection is considered complete only when the
sampling inspection is followed by the completion of the appropriate
sections of a Compliance Inspection Report (EPA Form 3560-3).
Guidance for conducting sampling inspections and for submitting the
appropriate report forms are contained in the "NPDES Compliance
Sampling Inspection Manual" which has previously been provided to
EPA Reaions and States.
In FY 80 review of DMR data will be automated utilizing a
computerized data management system which will be called the Compli-
ance Analysis System (CAS). When CAS becomes operational in the
Regions, parametric data from samples collected and analyzed as part
of a CSI will be entered into the system as a requirement for the
crediting of a completed CSI.
PPA 5 + 5. Each major municipal and nonmunicipal facility
should be inspected by the State or EPA a minimum of once annually
during the compliance schedule period and more often during critical
phases of construction. In addition, those permittees that have
online treatment facilities should be inspected to verify the
adequacy of their self-monitoring program and records and to assure
that their operation and maintenance program is being conducted in a
manner that will ensure permit compliance. In summary, compliance
evaluation inspections are undertaken for one or more of the follow-
ino purooses:
1. observe the status of construction required
by the permit;
2. assess adequacy of the permittee's self-
monitoring and reporting program;
-------
- 215 -
3. check the completeness and accuracy of
permittee's performance/compliance records;
4. evaluate the permittee's operation and
maintenance activities; and
5. express concern that permit requirements
be met.
In FY 80 EPA will provide major permittees with an annual set
of performance samples. The series of samples sent the permittee
will be governed by the effluent limits contained in the permit,
and at a maximum will contain samples for minerals, demand, suspended
solids, metals and nutrients. As one of the stated purposes of
a CEI is to "assess the adequacy of the permittee's self-monitoring
and reoorting orogram," CEIs will be employed to follow-up on
permittees who do not perform within an acceptable range of error on
one or more of the performance samples.
To ensure that the above outlined objectives are met, a Compliance
Evaluation Inspection of a municipal or nonmunicipal facility is
considered complete onlv when the site inspection is followed by the
completion and submission of the appropriate portions of a Compliance
Inspection Report Form (EPA 3560-3).
Guidance for conducting CEIs and submitting the appropriate
report forms are contained in the NPDES Compliance Evaluation
Inspections Manual (revised 1/78) which has previously been provided
to EPA Regions and States.
Compliance Evaluation Inspections of municipal facilities, as in
FY 79, have as one of their primary purposes the evaluation of the
permittees operation and maintenance activities as they relate to
present and future permit compliance. CEIs do not serve as the
means of obtaining operation and maintenance information for the
annual Section 210 report to Congress. Operation and maintenance
data for the Section 210 report is derived from operation and
maintenance inspections utilizing EPA Form 7500-5. It is recognized
however, that in many EPA Regions the personnel performing compliance
inspections are also the same personnel who perform operation and
maintenance inspections. Efficient utilization of scarce resources
dictates that for inspections of major municipal facilities that
fall within the program guidance priorities of OWE and OWPO, that
bot i EPA Forms 3560-3 and 7500-5 be completed and counted in FPRS.
-------
- 216 -
In FY 80 an Interagency agreement with the Corps of Engineers may
be completed whereby the Corps will perform Compliance Evaluation
Inspections for construction purposes on major POTWs being financed
under the construction grants program. The Corps will complete a
modified version of the Compliance Inspection Report (EPA Form
3650-3) and the appropriate inspection tracking data will be entered
by the Regions in PCS. CEIs performed by the Corps will not be
counted against the Regions CEI commitment.
PPA. 7. In FY 80 we will make a significant increase in the
number of compliance sampling inspections using biomonitoring to
screen for toxic substances in the discharges from permittees in the
primary industrial classifications. The objectives of the boimoni-
toring program are to:
1. Identify those permittees who may be meeting BPT or secondary
treatment effluent limitations but whose level of treatment
is not sufficient to ensure the biological integrity of the
receiving waters.
2. Identify those permittees who may have potential toxicants
in their discharge (s) that have not been identified in
their permit.
3. Evaluate compliance with permit toxicity limit requirements.
In those instances where biomonitoring reveals the presence of
toxic substances not addressed in the issued permit, the permittee
may be required through the 308 process to chemically and/or physical-
ly characterize the composition of the discharge to identify and
quantify the toxic substances or substances.
All Agency comoliance sampling inspections using acute toxicity
bioassay techniques for determining permit compliance and/or toxicity
levels must do so in strict adherence with the methods and materials
described in "Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents
to Aquatic Organisms" (EPA-600/4-78-012; Revised July"1978).
Identification of the inspection as a biomonitoring inspection
should be made by placing the letter B in the inspection type box
(#18) located at the top of page 1 of Form 3560-3.
-------
- 217 -
In the near future, the above referenced technical manual
will become an appendix of a larger Agency biomonitoring manual.
Once published, this manual will become the Agency's official
NPDES Biomonitoring Compliance Evaluation Manual. The manual is
expected to be completed by September 1979.
PPA 8. Compliance Sampling Inspections for Toxic Substances
In recognition of the increased laboratory support required
for compliance monitoring of permittees with discharges to toxic
substances other than heavy metals, phenols and cyanides, we
have created a separate PPA for CSIs that require such laboratory
support. These inspections have the same overall objectives as a
conventional CSI, but are approximately 17% more expensive to
perform than an industrial CSI. To identify the inspection as a
toxics CSI, place the letter X in the inspection type box (#18),
located at the too of page 1 of the compliance Inspection Report
Form 3560-3.
PPA 9 + 10. Performance Audit Inspections Conducted by Regions
In FY 80 we will begin a shift in emphasis away from routine
compliance monitoring inspections to more specific support of
enforcement needs by our inspection resources. This change in
emohasis will not effect our basic inspection goal of having each
major permittee inspected by EPA at least once during the five-year
life of the permit. To accomplish this shift in emphasis within
the framework of our basic inspection policy, a third type of
compliance inspection will be added to the two types of compliance
inspections now performed by the Regions. This third type of
compliance inspection, to be known as a "Performance Audit
Inspection" (PAI, requires on the average only 37.6% of the
resources now utilized for the performance of conventional CSIs.
A PAI has as its primary objective the verification of the
permittee's self-monitoring program. This does not differ from
the primary objective of our other two types of compliance
inspections. However, how this objective is achieved differs
from the techniques used in a CSI or CEI. In conducting a PAI
the inspector(s) will verify the permittee's program by observing
the permittee perform all the steps in the self-monitoring process
-- from sample collection and flow measurent to laboratory
analyses and data workshop and reporting. The procedures develop-
ed for PAIs will be equally applicable to verification of both
chemical and biological self-monitoring data.
-------
- 218 -
Guidance on the objectives of a PAI and procedures on how
a PAI shall be conducted will be forthcoming from Headquarters
orior to the beginning of FY 80. For planning purposes, a
PAI will require on the average 12 work days or require 5.45 work
years to perform 100 PAIs.
PPA 11. DMR Quality Assurance Program
In FY 80 EPA will provide each major permittee with an annual
set of performance samples. The series of samples sent the
permittees willbe governed by the Effluent limitations contained
in the permit, and at a maximum, will contain samples for minerals,
demand, suspended solids, metals and nutrients. Permittees
will be required to analyze the samples and return the data to
the local coordinator (EPA or State) within a fixed time period,
generally 30 days. Followup on non-acceptable performance may
range from a letter and/or telephone notification, laboratory
evaluation, AO issuance, to formal legal action, depending on the
cause of the nonacceptable performance.
As one of the stated purposes of a CEI is to "assess the
adequacy of the permittee^ self-monitoring and reporting program,"
CEIs will be employed to follow-up on nonacceptable performance
by permittees in those cases where a laboratory inspection is
necessary. CEIs used for followup on the DMR Quality Assurance
program have been set out as a separate PPA. It is anticipated
that the initial nonacceptable rate for permittees will be 60%
and that 1/3 of the nonacceptable permittee1 s laboratories will
require on-site followup inspections. More specific guidance on
the objectives and procedures of the DMR Assurance Program will
be forthcoming from Headquarters prior to the beginning of FY
80.
PPA 12. Construction Verification Inspections Conducted by
the Corps of Engineers
In FY 80 an Interagency Agreement with the Corps of Engineers
will be comoleted whereby the Corps will perform CEI on major
municipal wastewater treatment facilities being financed under
the construction grants program. The objective of these CEIs will
be to verify construction progress. The Corps will complete a
modified version of the Compliance Inspection Report (EPA Form
3560-3) and the appropriate inspection tracking data will be
entered by the Regions into PCS through the interface with
GICS.
-------
- 219 -
Although CEIs performed by the Corps will not be counted
against the Region's CEI commitment, this activity has been
designated as a separate PPA to better identify and track the
number of CEIs performed by the Corps for this specific purpose.
It is anticipated that the Corps will be able to perform approxi-
mately one-third of the municipal CEIs now performed by EPA. The
resource saving from this activity may now be shifted into
oerforining CEIs from DMR Quality Assurance followup.
PPA 13. Pretreatment Compliance Evaluation Inspections
In FY 80 we will begin a modest program to verify compliance
with pretreatment requirements for major contributing industries.
Compliance Evaluation Inspections will be used to verify permit
pretreatment requirements and completion of the appropriate
portions of the standard NPDES Compliance Inspection Report will
be required. Identification of the inspection as a pretreatment
evaluation should be made by placing the letter P in the inspec-
ion tvpe box (#18) located at the top of page 1 of form 3560-3.
PPA 14. Dredge and Fill Compliance Evaluation Inspections
In FY 80 we will conduct a modest number of site visits to
verify compliance with section 404 dredge and fill permits.
Compliance Evaluation Inspections will be used to verify section
404 permit conditions and completion of the appropriate portions
of the standard NPDES Compliance Inspection Report will be
required. Identifcation of the inspection as a section 404 dredge
and fill evaluation should be made by placing the letter D in the
inspection type box (418) located at the top of page 1 of Form
3560-3.
PPA 15. National State Overview Program
The National State Overview Program has been developed to
assure that the States which have been delegated the primary
authority for the administration of the NPDES program, exercise
their enforcement perogatives in a consistent manner. Under the
Act, the Agency has a continuing responsibility to make certain
that these State-run programs operate in accordance with National
standards. The State Overview program is a fulfillment of the
Agency's regulatory responsibiities and insures that the regulated
puD.lic receives equitable treatment in meeting the requirements
of their <^PDSS oermits. The program identifies a number of
overview activities which will establish a base level of Agency
presence in each State to ascertain whether NPDES requirements
are being met. Since the costs associated
-------
- 220 -
with these activities cannot be accurately measured using the
Water Quality Enforcement model, a separate State Overview model
has been developed for issuance with specific Regional guidance
on the administration of a State Overview Program. This guidance
will be issued prior to the beginning of PY 80 and require the
development of annual State Overview plans which describe Region-
al overview activities and their associated costs based on the
new model.
PLANNED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS
1. Number of pre-enforcement evaluations of self-monitoring
reports.
2. Number of technical enforcement evaluationsof self-monitoring
reports.
3. Number of compliance sampling inspections of major municipal
oermittees. (commitment - quarterly)
4. Number of compliance sampling inspections of major nonmuni-
cipal permittees, (commitment - quarterly)
5. Number of compliance evaluation inspections of major nonmuni-
cipal permittees, (commitment - quarterly)
6. Number of compliance evaluation inspections of major nonmuni-
cioal permittees, (commitment - quarterly)
7. Number of compliance sampling inspections conducted using
biomonitoring screening for toxic substances. (commitment -
quarterly)
8. Number of compliance sampling inspections for toxic substances,
(commitment-quarterly)
9. Number of performance audit inspections of major municipal
permi ttees. (commitment-quarterly)
10. Number of performance audit inspections of major nonmunicipal
permittees. (commitment - quarterly)
11. Number of compliance evaluation inspections conducted for
DMR QA followup. (commitment - quarterly)
12. Number of municioal construction evaluation inspections
performed by the Corps of Engineers. (commitment - semi-annual)
-------
- 221 -
13. Number of compliance evaluation inspections for pretreatment
conducted. (commitment - semi-annual)
14. Number of compliance evaluation inspections conducted to
monitor compliance with major dredge and fill permits. (commit-
ment - semi-annual)
15. Number of NPDES AOs and NOVs issued.
16. Number of municipal NPDES cases referred to Headquarters.
(commitment quarterly)
17. Number of nonmunicipal NPDES cases referred to Headquarters.
(commitment - quarterly)
18. Number of SPCC (no plan) actions initiated by the Regions.
(commitment - quarterly)
19. Number of Ocean Dumping actions initiated by the Regions.
(commitment - quarterly)
20. Number of oil spill violations referred to the CG and U.S.
Attorney, (commitment - quarterly)
21. Number of hazardous substance violation referrals to Head-
quarters, (commitment - quarterly)
22. Number of section 404 enforcement actions taken by the
Peqions. (commitment - quarterly)
23. Number of Quarterly Noncompliance Reports prepared.
24. Number of audit and/or overview of State NPDES program
conducted, (commitment - quarterly)
25. Number of pretreatment AOs and NOVs issued. (commitment
- quarterly)
26. Number of pretreatment referrals to Headquarters, (commitment
- quarterly)
27. Number of Regional referrals of noncomplying Federal facili-
ties, (commitment - quarterly)
-------
- 222 -
28. Average amount of time (days) it will take the Region to
respond to major NPDES permit violations. (commitment - quarterly)
29. Number of major municipal permittees not in compliance with
schedule requirements. (commitment - quarterly)
30. Number of major municipal permittees not in compliance with
effluent requirements. (commitment - quarterly)
31. Number of major nonmunicipal permittees not in compliance
with schedule requirements. (commitment - quarterly)
32. Number of major
with effluent r
nonmunicipal permittees not in compliance
quirements. (commitment - quarterly)
-------
- 223 -
3306 - Permit Issuance
1. Number of major permits in "primary industries" reissued or
extended.
2. Number of major permits in "primary industries" reissued by
BAT guidelines.
3. Number of major permits in "secondary industries" reissued.
4. Number of major permits in "secondary industries" reissued by
best engineering judgement (no BAT guidelines)
5. Number of major funded POTW permits issued or reissued, (not
301(i) modifications)
6. Number of ajudicatory hearings for major industrial and
municipal permits initiated in previous FY, denied, conducted
and/or settled
7. Number of ajudicatory hearings for major industrial and
municipal permits initiated in current FY, denied, and/or settled.
8. Number of dredge and fill materials discharge permits reviewed,
9. Number of new source permits based on NSPS issued
10. Number of exoiring major municipal permits modified to
incorporate compliance schedule time extensions pursuant to
section 301(i)
11. Number of municipal POTW pretreatment programs to be develop-
ed and approved.
12. Number of major municipal (POTW) dischargers that must have a
permit.
13. Number of major industrial permits issued and in effect (not
expired).
14. Number of major municipal permits issued and in effect (not
expired).
15. Number of major primary industrial dischargers that must have
a permit.
16. Number of major secondary industrial dischargers that must
have a permit.
17. Number of major Federal facility permits issued and in effect
(not expired.)
-------
1980/1981 DRINKING WATER MEDIA GUIDANCE
-------
DRINKING WATER
MEDIA OVERVIEW
The goal of the drinking water program is to
protect the public health by assuring the safety
of the drinking water.
Assuring the safety of drinking water is primarily
the responsibility of State and local governments.
However, Congress has determined that the Federal
Government should share in this responsibility by
assisting, reinforcing, and setting standards for
State and local efforts.
The Safe Drinking Water Act requires (1) primary
health related drinking water regulations requisite
to protect the public health, (2) public water systems
supervision programs (PWS) to assure compliance with
the regulations, (3) underground injection control
programs (UIC) to protect underground sources of
drinking water, and (4) the provision of emergency
assistance. The Act envisioned that the States would
have primary enforcement responsibility for both the
PWS and UIC programs. Moreover, the Act is designed
to encourage voluntary compliance with the regulations.
The program activities will focus on implementation
of the primary drinking water regulations in non-primacy
States and on Indian lands, assistance on the implementation
of the trihalomethane and synthetic organics regulations;
maintaining a strong management program in primacy States
to assure primacy implementation; continuing efforts to
encourage non-primacy States to assume primacy; emergency
assistance; financial assistance to States; research,
development and implementation of additional regulations
to control other contaminants in drinking water; implementation
of a program to protect underground sources of drinking water;
the initiation of enforcement actions to ensure compliance
and implementation of State/EPA agreements.
Activities within each major area involve at least
two of the program offices. The assignment of program office
responsibilities is based on program expertise. In general,
the Office of Drinking Water and its Regional counterparts
will be responsible for the program activities involving
on-going communications with the public, the water systems,
injection facility operators, and the States. The responsi-
-------
- 228 -
bilities also include laboratory certification, technical
assistance and evaluations, standards development, technicail
expertise in regard to variance and exemption applications
and other legal action, data handling and evaluation, UIC
primacy application review, technical evaluation of
permit applications, and sole source petitions reviews.
Drinking Water Enforcement positions in Headquarters
will be devoted to the following activities: permitting
and enforcement guidance for the UIC program; coordination;
budget and administrative efforts; legal strategies for
regional and State overview programs, including guidance on
compliance monitoring and inspection; enforcement and legal
assistance for regional PWS programs; and legal support for
actions initiated in response to emergency situations.
Regional Drinking Water Enforcement staff will participate
with Drinking Water program offices in legal aspects of
issuing variances and exemptions by assisting in developing
compliance schedules and interim reporting and monitoring
requirements to be included in variances and exemptions to
be approved by the Regional Administrator (unless otherwise
delegated); providing legal and administrative support in
initiating formal enforcement actions; working with ODW to
ensure enforceability of compliance actions or other require-
ments imposed on public water systems; issuing UIC permits
to facilities disposing of wastes underground; investigating
and initiating civil and criminal actions for violations of
the UIC regulations; and providing technical and legal support
in legal actions initiated in response to emergency situations.
The Research program will relate to: (1) causes,
diagnoses, and prevention of diseases and other impairments
in man resulting directly or indirectly from contaminants
found in drinking water; (2) the treatment and control of
those contaminants; and (3) the provision of dependable,
economical, and safe supplies of water, including the
protection of underground sources of drinking water.
Research will also be conducted to develop and implement
quality assurance procedures and protocols for water supply
laboratories to assure that laboratory analytical data are
accurate and valid.
Planning Assumptions
The planning and operating guidance for FY 1980
is based upon the following assumptions. For consistency
purposes, the Regions are requested to adopt similar
assumptions in preparing their submissions.
-------
- 229 -
o Currently proposed organic regulations
will be promulgated in Summer, 1979.
o Revised drinking water regulations
will be proposed in early FY 1980.
o UIC regulations will promulgated by
January, 1980.
o By FY 1981, all 57 States will be listed
as requiring underground injection
control programs. They will then become
eligible for grants. The following list
shows for each year, the number of States
first becoming eligible in that year:
- FY 1979 - 23
- FY 1980 - 18
- FY 1981 - 16
o Consolidated permit regulations
will be in effect in FY 1980.
o EPA itself will utilize the grant allo-
cation for underground water source
protection of listed States that (1) do
not apply for grants or (2) indicate
that they will not assume primacy for the
UIC program.
o Sole/principal Source Aquifer (1424(e))
regulations will be promulgated in
Spring, 1979.
o In FY 1980, EPA will implement public
water systems supervision programs in
12 States: Indiana, Pennsylvania, Oregon,
District of Columbia, South Dakota, Utah
Wyoming, Illinois, Vermont, North Carolina,
American Samoa, and Northern Marianas.
o A legislative amendment extending the
compliance schedule for exemptions will
be adopted.
These assumptions represent the best projections
based upon information available to Headquarters at
this time. There undoubtedly will be changes; however,
for consistency these assumptions should be reflected
in Regional operating plans.
Media Priorities
The media priorities for FY 1980 and FY 1981
provide general guidance reflecting the National
Program Managers' high priority items. These
priorities may differ from one Region to another
depending upon each Region's particular situation.
Regions maintain the flexibility to pursue priorities
which satisfy the needs of their unique situations.
-------
- 230 -
° Priority 1 activities are:
to establish maximum contaminant
levels and/or treatment techniques
to assure the safety of drinking
water.
to implement the organics regulations.
to initiate enforcement actions and
respond to emergency situations
involving substantial threats to
public health.
to take enforcement actions, as
necessary, in non-primacy States.
to maintain a strong management
program in primacy States including
overview of State enforcement
activities and grants administration.
to develop a coordinated ground-water
policy and strategy by the third
quarter of FY 80.
to encourage State assumption of
primacy for PWS and UIC programs.
to implement and enforce a program
for assuring compliance with the
primary drinking water regulations
in non-primacy States and on Indian
lands.
to conduct research into the health
effects and treatment of trace
organics and investigate alternative
disinfectant techniques.
to maximize program effectiveness and
integration through the consolidated
permits program, the State/EPA agreements,
etc.
to complete the assessment of surface
impoundments.
o Priority 2 activities are:
to protect designated sole source
aquifers.
to develop UIC implementation plans
where necessary.
to investigate the relationship of
inorganic contaminants and asbestos
fibers on health.
to provide technical and legal
assistance for enforcement actions
in primacy States.
to increase public awareness and
public participation.
-------
- 231 -
° Priority 3 activities are:
to develop a coordinated ground-
water research program.
to conduct research on direct and
indirect additives.
to conduct studies on home water
treatment devices.
to initiate enforcement actions
in primacy States, as appropriate,
where a State is unable to or fails
to do so.
HEADQUARTERS PLANS
Abatement and Control
Headquarters Plans and Priorities — The Headquarters
plans and priorities(which involve Regional and State
involvement) for FY 1980/1981 focus on the protection
of the public health through the establishment of
drinking water standards that assure the safety of
the drinking water, protection of underground sources
of drinking water and management of State delegations
and EPA's continued implementation of the public water
systems supervision and underground injection
control programs.
FY 1980 planned activities fall into the
following three priority levels:
o Priority 1 activities include:
Development of drinking water
regulations which address pathogens
and radiological contaminants;
establishment of maximum contaminant
levels for particular organic compounds
and proposal of Revised Drinking Water
regulations for inorganic contaminants.
Management of the implementation
of the organics standards.
Conduct of economic analyses in
support of regulations development.
Headquarters coordination with Regions
to encourage non-primacy States to
assume primacy.
Analysis of the financial impact
of the drinking water program and the
subsidy issue.
National oversight of the implementation
of the public water systems supervision
program based upon Federal Reporting Data
Systems data.
-------
- 232 -
Promulgation of the underground
injection control program regulations.
Development of a coordinated ground-
water policy and implementation
strategy with Regional and State
participation.
Development of technical guidance
documents relating to implementation
of the UIC program.
Initiation of public awareness and
public participation activities for
the ground water program.
Review of primacy applications.
Issuance of toxicological opinions
relating to spills and emergencies.
ADP in support of regulation changes.
Guidance on SEAs to implement program
integration goals.
o Priority 2 activities include:
Development of a mandatory laboratory
certification program.
Review of water treatment additives.
- Analytical support relating to spills
and emergencies.
Development of UlC-related training
program for Regional and State personnel
Analysis of the surface impoundment
assessment data.
Public participation activities
related to the public water systems
supervision program.
- Guidance on UIC program implementation
on Indian lands.
o Priority 3 activities include:
Development of drinking water
criteria applicable to land treat-
ment, hazardous waste, etc.
Development of a policy relating to
home water treatment devices.
Recommendations based upon the
Rural Water Survey.
ADP system enhancements.
-------
- 233 -
FY 1981 projected activities and priorities
will include in addition to the continuing FY 1980
activities: (1) promulgation of new bacterial
standards, (2) promulgation of the Revised Drinking
Water Regulations, (3) development of a regulatory
strategy to control corrosivity of water in distri-
bution systems, (4) preliminary activities directed
at the establishment of wastewater reuse criteria,
(5) a major new initiative for regulating drinking water
additives through use of TSCA authorities. These
activities will primarily be included as Priority 1
activities, subject to resource constraints.
Changes (FY 1980) -- EPA intends to list all
57 States as requiring underground injection
control programs by FY 1981. By FY 1980, a total
of 41 States will be listed (the original assumption
was based upon 22 States being listed).
Alternatives for carrying out the program — In
non-primacy States, the use of contractors/grantees
to implement operational activities such as
conducting inventories, sanitary surveys, data
processing should be considered. Resources for these
contracts/grants are available in the FY 80 budget.
The feasibility of using term employees to implement
EPA enforcement responsibilities in non-primacy
States which will eventually assume primacy may
be investigated.
Modification of PWS grant regulations to allow
use of grant funds in non-primacy States will
be considered.
Enforcement
Priority 1
The Drinking Water Enforcement program's first
priority for FY 80 will be response to emergency
situations involving substantial threats to public
health.
o Headquarters will provide any assistance
required by the Regions for preparation of
enforcement cases initiated in response to
emergency situations involving substantial
threats to public health.
-------
- 234 -
Priority 2
Plans will include preparation of guidance necessary
to conduct programs required under the Safe Drinking
Water Act.
o Develop an enforcement manual to address
how and when enforcement actions should
be taken where non-compliance with Public
Water System requirements has been identi-
fied. (Estimated distribution date for
final document: 2nd quarter, FY 80)
o Develop guidance for implementation of an
Underground Injection Control Enforcement
Program to control underground injections,
including toxic substances (Estimated
distribution of final document: 3rd quarter,
FY 80).
o Develop guidance for issuing Notices of
Violation (Estimated final distribution:
1st quarter, FY 80).
o Develop compliance assurance guidance covering
compliance monitoring and inspection activities
for the Public Water System Program (Estimated
final distribution: 3rd quarter, FY 80).
o Develop guidance for Regions overviewing
State Underground Injection Control Programs,
addressing enforcement actions and assessing
adequacy of control of underground injection
of toxic substances (Estimated final distri-
bution: 4th quarter, FY 80).
Priority 3
Headquarter will overview enforcement actions and
assist where necessary to assure compliance with
requirements of the Act.
o Review all referrals to the Department of
Justice and provide legal assistance to the
Regions in the preparation of major enforcement
actions concerning violations of National
Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations,
including organics.
4
-------
- 235 -
FY 81 - Plans and Priorities
Priority 1
The first priority for FY 81 will continue to be
response to emergency situations involving substantial
threats to public health.
o Headquarters will provide legal and technical
support, as requested, to Regions initiating
enforcement actions in response to emergency
situations.
Priority 2
As a second priority, Headquarters will prepare guidance
for conducting those programs required under the Safe
Drinking Water Act.
o Develop guidance on enforcement actions
covering non-compliance with variances
and exemptions, including non-compliance
with the January 1, 1981 Interim Primary
Drinking Water Standards deadline (Estimated
final distribution: 1st quarter, FY 81).
o Develop guidance covering compliance
monitoring and inspection procedures for
a UIC enforcement program (Estimated final
distribution: 2nd quarter, FY 81).
Priority 3
As a third priority, Headquarters will overview
enforcement actions and assist where necessary to
assure compliance with requirements of the Act.
o Review all referrals to DOJ and provide
legal assistance to the Regions in the
preparation of major enforcement actions
concerning violations of National Interim
Primary Drinking Water Regulations, including
organics.
FY 80 - Changes
More attention will focus on assessing the adequacy of
State Public Water System Enforcement Program. Initial
effort will also be directed in FY 80 to phasing in the
Revised Primary Drinking Water Standards.
-------
- 236 -
FY 81 - Changes
Attention will focus in FY 81 on compliance with
Interim Primary Drinking Water Standards and on enforce-
ment actions necessary to assure compliance. EPA will
also begin to assess State Underground Injection Control
Enforcement Programs for adequacy.
Research and Development
The Safe Drinking Water Act is reasonably speci-
fic in setting forth the Agency's responsibilities, so
it has been possible to develop a drinking water
strategy with a "step-by-step" schedule of future
activities. One major element of this strategy is to
conduct research to improve the scientific and tech-
nical basis for Primary and Secondary Drinking Water
Regulations (especially regulations based on Maximum
Contaminant Levels — MCL's), and regulations to protect
the quality of ground water. The issues have been
reviewed by a non-government advisory committee formed
to update the 1962 U.S. Public Health Service Drinking
Water Standards, an ad hoc group of the Agency's Science
Advisory Board, the National Drinking Water Advisory
Council and by the Drinking Water Research Committee
during its deliberations on FY 80 research activities,.
These groups and others from within the Agency's
Operating and Research Offices determined that research
was necessary to help answer the following basic
questions:
1. What substances occur in drinking water
supplies at a sufficient number of locations
to warrant regulation?
2. What are the effects of these substances
on human health?
3. What analytical procedures should be used
to monitor water to assure that the Revised
Primary Drinking Water Regulations are
met?
4. Because some of these substances are formed
during transport, storage, treatment and
distribution, what changes in treatment
practices would be appropriate to minimize
the formation of these compounds in water
delivered at the consumer's tap?
5. What treatment technology must be applied
to reduce contaminant levels to the concen-
trations specified in the Regulations?
-------
- 237 -
The Agency has decided to focus on these broad
questions in order to develop a defensible basis for
standards. These same questions apply to wastewater
when it is being considered as a water source for
drinking. Underlying this research is a quality
assurance effort that also plays an important role in
the certification of non-EPA laboratories and, generally,
in assuring the reliability and accuracy of laboratory
analyses of drinking water samples.
The setting of research priorities has resulted
primarily from the interpretations by the Office of
Drinking Water and the Drinking Water Research
Committee of the regulatory requirements set forth in
the Safe Drinking Water Act in light of the target
dates specified in that Act. These groups have given
full consideration to the gaps in existing information
and to the principal problems referred to them for
action by the Regions, the National Drinking Water
Advisory Council, and the National Academy of Sciences.
The research staff, however, plays a major role in
setting priorities due to their insight (derived from
experience) regarding the general feasibility of broad
classes of analytical measurements, the time it takes
to conduct health effects and engineering experiments,
and the cost of generating additional research data.
These deliberations resulted in a balanced
research program that includes studies of short- and
long-range health effects studies, as well as efforts
to improve analytic methods and treatment techniques.
Approximately 45 percent of the budget will go to health
effects projects (many of which are conducted jointly
with the Department of Health, Education and Welfare),
40 percent to the development of treamtment technology,
6.5 percent to improvement of analytical methods, and
8.5 percent to groundwater concerns. These allocations
may change as a result of the Drinking Water Research
Committee's deliberations for FY 81.
Trace organics are still the least understood
and most troublesome drinking water contaminants, so
approximately 43 percent of the funds are directed
toward that problem. Research into trace organics
will examine their health effects, and will also
focus on development of appropriate monitoring and
treatment technology. The second highest priority
-------
- 238 -
is the impact of inorganic contaminants, particularly
asbestos fibers, on health, so a large effort will be
made in this area, too. We will also closely examine
the implications of the difference in the incidence of
cardiovascular disease between those consumers drinking
soft water and those drinking hard water. Determining
the incidence and effects of microbial contamination as
well as developing appropriate monitoring and treatment
technology for such contaminants will remain a relatively
high public health priority because outbreaks of
water-borne disease still occur in the United States,
especially in poorly operated distribution systems. We
will also study the causes of corrosion in distribution
systems and possible methods for controlling it, and we
will give greater attention to the development of
cost-effective treatment techniques for removing
contaminants from small water supplies.
The various elements of the program have been
arrayed in priority order for FY 80/81.
In the short term, our highest priority will be
technology development and assuring the quality of
analytical methods now in use. In the long term,
emphasis will be placed on health effects, development
of improved analytical methods, and ground-water
research.
The research strategy has been designed to
develop information from which EPA can determine if
there is a need to regulate additional drinking water
contaminants. Furthermore, if regulations are deemed
appropriate, our research information can help
establish the levels at which standards should be set.
Our drinking water research data will also be used
by EPA's Office of Drinking Water to evaluate insti-
tutional solutions to some drinking water problems.
Some of the pertinent areas are regionalized water
supply systems to serve the small scale user, aid to
states regarding the economics of water supply, and
the management of water supply systems.
Better Methods to Identify and Quantify Contaminants
In the absence of reliable contaminant measure-
ment and monitoring methods, it will be impossible to
provide scientifically valid and legally defensible
data to support and enforce the regulations issued
-------
- 239 -
under the authority of the Safe Drinking Water Act.
Consequently, primary emphasis will be placed on
continuing our quality assurance program in EPA,
state, local, and contract laboratories.
Objectives
Priority 1
Continuing quality
assurance functions
Analytical methods
for organics
Surrogate methods for
measurement of classes
of organics
Priority 2
Analytical methods
for microbial
contaminants
Major Research
Quality assurance
program to supporu
monitoring require-
ments for Safe
Drinking Water Act
performance evalua-
tions, etc.
Analytical methods
for nonpurgeable
organics.
Surrogate methods
for measurement of
volatile organic
compounds.
Methods to determine
presence of cysts
and viruses.
Radiometric methods
for detection of
sanitary indicator
microorganisms in
treated water.
Analysis of ATP
(adenosine
triphosphate)
methods for moni-
toring bacterial
levels.
-------
- 240 -
Priority 3
Multielement analytical - Comparison of
techniques several methods
of multielement
analysis, i.e.,
optical emission
spectrometry with
an inductively
coupled plasma
source and x-ray
fluorescence.
Better Treatment Technology for Drinking Water —
The lack of unequivocal health effects data related
to organic contaminants in drinking water does not
relieve EPA of responsibility for developing appro-
priate treatment methods when reasonable doubt about
health effects exists and monitoring is not practical.
The development of treatment processes to control
organic compounds will be the first priority in the
area of treatment technology. Organic contaminants
selected for study will be identified in surveys that
quantify the prevalence of the compounds and identify
available health effects data. Treatment processes
will then be developed through bench and pilot-scale
studies and will be studied in field evaluations.
We will attempt to adopt some processes now used in
larger treatment systems for use in the smaller
systems. In doing so, our objectives will be to keep
the technology simple enough so that the training
required for operators will be minimal.
The two immediate needs in the inorganics area
are: to develop treatment processes that will enable
small systems to meet regulations economically, and
to evaluate treatment processes for removal of asbesti-
forms. A further objective will be the development of
treatment processes to control other inorganic
compounds in small systems, with primary emphasis on
the more troublesome inorganics such as nitrates,
arsenic, fluorides, and selenium.
-------
- 241 -
The major thrust in the area of treatment tech-
nology to reduce microbial contaminants will be the
evaluation of alternative disinfection methods with
emphasis on (1) small systems and (2) preventing the
deterioration of water quality in distribution systems
Objectives
Priority 1
Processes for organics
control including
alternative disin-
fection technology
Priority 2
- Processes for inorganics
control with emphasis
on small systems
Major Research
Field studies
involving carbon
adsorption methods
for organics con-
trol.
Bench-scale studies
of techniques for
controlling fluo-
ride, arsenic,
nitrates and selenium,
Field studies to
evaluate full scale
operations of
promising
inorganics control
methods that were
successful at. bench
scale.
Field studies to
evaluate processes
for removing asbesin-
forms .
Special studies to
provide treatment
methods for small
systems, e.g.,
reverse osmosis,,
ion exchangef
activated alumina.,
-------
- 242 -
Priority 3
Microbial control
technology
Virus and parasite
removal.
Identification of
factors affecting
growth of micro--
organisms in
distribution
systems.
- Development and
evaluation of
alternative
indicators of
disinfection
efficiency.
Health Effects — As of April 1978, 698 organic com-
pounds had been identified in drinking water within
the United States. While important information on
incidence, concentrations, and health effects still
needs to be developed, a number of these compounds
are already strongly suspected to be detrimental to
health. Therefore, we will first attempt to assess
the health effects of certain of these organic com-
pounds. The focus of this health effect research
will be on potential carcinogenicity. Because there
is such a large number of compounds, our research will
follow two distinct avenues of investigation. First,
we will examine those compounds which have already
been identified as potential human health hazards.
Our second avenue of investigations will focus on
various groupings of compounds selected on the basis
of their high observed concentrations and high fre-
quency of occurrence, in conjunction with preliminary
determinations of significant hazard based either on
available data or on short-term bioassays.
Considerable attention has been given to the
relationship between the presence of inorganic compounds
in drinking water and cardiovascular disease. The
National Academy of Sciences predicted a possible 15%
reduction in heart disease mortality by manipulation
of the hardness of the nation's water supplies but
-------
- 243 -
stressed that the specific alterations that would be
appropriate have yet to be determined. The Council on
Environmental Quality has also published information
that suggests a correlation between water softness and
heart disease. As with organics, we will continue to
develop health effects information on these various
inorganic compounds.
Objectives
Priority 1
Health effects of
organic compounds
and alternative dis-
infection techniques
Major Research
Concentration and
chemical character-
izations of organic
compounds from tap
water in five
cities.
Selection and
evaluation of
indices of
organics
significant to
health.
Association between
cancer and exposure
to drinking water
contaminants.
Selection of
organic parameters
which can be used
for standard
setting.
Toxicological and
epidemiological
studies to validate
the health signi-
figance of organic
parameters.
Health impacts of
the use of alter-
native disinfection
techniques.
-------
- 244 -
Priority 2
Health effects of
inorganic compounds
Health effects of
additives used in
treatment and distri-
bution of drinking
water
Priority 3
Protect drinking
water from micro-
bial contamination
Health effects of
arsenic.
Neurochemical
effects of lead.
Carcinogenic poten-
tial of nitrate.
Health effects of
asbestiforms.
Inorganics and
cardiovascular
disease.
Assistance in
developing
protocols and
implementing
the program.
Annual review of
waterborne disease
outbreaks.
Characterization oi:
the etiological
agents of viral
gastroenteritis
and giardiasis.
Scientific Basis for Protecting Ground Water Quality
A primary objective of the program is to identify
major problems in the protection of ground water and to
provide the appropriate assessment methods to States
and communities. A corollary objective is to develop
scientific and engineering guidelines on which we can
base source control criteria. Work on assessment
-------
- 245 -
methods will include development of biological and
chemical indicators of ground-water pollution, methods
to detect pressure increases resulting from well
injections, and protocols for determining, in any given
locality, the probable impact of specified activities
with known pollution potential.
Objectives
Priority 1
Assessment methods for
monitoring the trans-
port and transformation
of ground water contami-
nants
Priority 2
Establish scientific
basis for controlling
various classes of
pollutant sources
Priority 3
Identification of
major ground-water
pollution problems
Major Research
Biological and
chemical indicators
of ground-water
pollution.
Pressure increases
resulting from well
injections.
Transport and
transformation of
hazardous materials,
Petroleum explora-
tion and development.
Land application of
waste.
Artificial recharge.
Agricultural practices
Extension of State-
specific studies
from the current 34
States to 50 States.
-------
- 246 -
Changes Anticipated - FY 80/81
o The ORD public health initiative for FY 80 includes
an increase of nearly $5 million over the FY 79
level for health research. These resources will
be used to intensify our research into the health
risks posed by organic, inorganic, and microbial
contaminants. A strong emphasis will be placed
on organic compounds and their carcinogenic poten-
tial. ORD will initiate the development of an
investigative strategy which will help address
systematically the numerous organic compounds- that:
have been identified as being of potential concern.
Emphasis on the public health initiative will
continue in FY 81.
o In FY 80 and 81, we will emphasize field evaluations
of modular treatment methods for control of
organics. Information from these field evaluations
will be used to guide regulation development and
implementation.
o In accordance with a congressional mandate, ORD
expanded research into the reuse of wastewater for
potable purposes by $8 million in FY 1979. $1
million for the reuse program is in the FY 80
research budget for drinking water. ORD plans to
budget the $1 million for FY 81 within the research
budget for water quality.
-------
247 -
REGIONAL PLANS
Abatement and Control
Regional Priorities f_or_ the Ground Water Protection
Program — The Regional priorities for the ground water
protection program center on the implementation of the
underground injection control regulations, implementation
of State/EPA agreements which encourage program inte-
gration and completion of the surface impoundment
assessment and protection of sole/principal sources
of drinking water. The FY 1980 planned activities fall
into the following three priority levels:
o Priority 1 activities are:
- Emergency response to ground-water
contamination incidents.
Administration of the underground water
source protection grants.
- Providing technical assistance to States
to assume primary enforcement responsi-
bility by assisting in the review of
exis.ting legislation and regulations,
revising current State programs, etc.
Continuing oversight of grantees and
contractors conducting the Surface
Impoundment Assessment (SIA) program.
Implement State/EPA agreements through
program .integration with RCRA, 208,
Environmental Impact Statements and NPDES
programs.
° Priority 2 activities are:
Processing petitions and project reviews
and preparing Memoranda of Understanding
(MODs) regarding Section 1424(e) - sole
source aquifer actions.
- Initiating UIC activities in non-primacy
States arc Indian lands such as inventories
for Class IV wells, aquifer mapping, inven-
tories and assessments for injection wells
ana negotiating interagency agreements
regarding program implementation on Indian
lando,
-------
- 248 -
Promoting public participation in
the UIC program and public awareness
of statutory and regulatory requirements.
° Priority 3 activity is:
Implementing data handling and storage
procedures to process inventory data.
Regional Priorities for the Public Water Systems
Supervision Program — The Regional priorities focus
on implementation of the Interim Primary Drinking
Water Regulations including the organics regulations,
management of the State delegation and implementing
State/EPA agreeements. The FY 1980 planned activities
fall into the following three priority levels:
o Priority 1
Maintain and enforce a program for assuring
compliance with the National Primary Drinking
Water Regulations (NPDWR) in non-primacy States,
Indian lands and over interstate carriers.
Conduct sanitary surveys of high
priority systems impacting public
health.
Implement Interagency Agreements (lAGs)
with the Indian Health Service (IHS).
Conduct public hearings on exemption
compliance schedules for community
systems.
Coordinate with the Enforcement Division.
Issue and follow-up on violation notifi-
cations .
Implement non-community systems strategy
plan.
Manage the laboratory certification program.
Maintain data management system.
Provide training and public education.
Provide emergency assistance after spills and
ground-water contamination and situations involving
imminent and subtantial health endangerment to public
water supplies and underground water supplies.
Supply technical assistance as needed.
Administer grants to States to implement and
maintain their public water system program.
Award grants in timely manner.
Conduct mid-year review of program plans.
-------
- 249 -
Provide data for national grant
program.
Develop a strong oversight program for primacy
States to assure maintenance of primacy.
Continue quality assurance for
certified laboratories.
Perform State-by-State management
review and information exchange
(evaluation).
Emphasize State/EPA Agreements with respect to
201, 208, and National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) coordination.
Encourage States to assume primacy.
o Priority 2
Provide technical assistance to the States in
the implementation of the organics regulation.
Implement monitoring of trihalomethane
(THM) in cities over 10,000 (assuming
the regulation promulgated is the same
as that proposed).
Participate in training and public
awareness forums in both primacy and
non-primacy States.
Assist States in revising regulations.
Provide technical assistance for synthetic
organics and the processing of variances and
exemptions to the organic regulations (as promulgated)
Participate in training and public
awareness forums in both primacy and
non-primacy States on monitoring and
health effects of Granular Activated
Carbon (GAC) regulations.
Assist States in processing variances
and exemptions.
Assist States in revising regulations.
Review approach for GAC facilities.
Provide analytical assistance/lab
certification.
Coordinate with Enforcement Division.
-------
- 250 -
o Priority 3
Coordinate the public water system program
with other environmental programs.
Enforcement
Priority 1
o Initiate enforcement actions in response
to emergency situations involving substantial
threats to public health.
o Take enforcement actions, as necessary, in
non-primacy States.
o Maintain overview of State enforcement
activities.
o Respond to emergency actions involving
imminent and substantial endangerment to health,
Priority 2
o Provide technical and legal assistance for
enforcement actions in primacy States.
o Develop a UIC enforcement program in
the Regional office where designated States
will not assume primary enforcement responsi-
bility.
o Enforce the health related Primary
Drinking Water Regulations including
significant violations of MCLs, reporting
requirements, and public notification
requirements. (Some actions will be contin-
uation of actions initiated in FY 79.)
o Provide enforcement assistance to States
having primary enforcement responsibility
but which have requested EPA assistance in
initiating enforcement action against
violators of health-related primary
drinking water regulations.
Priority 3
o Initiate enforcement actions in primacy
States where a State is unable to or
fails to do so.
o Begin implementing a management information
system designed to track compliance
monitoring inspection and enforcement
information.
o Overview State issued variances and exemptions
and State initiated enforcement actions.
-------
- 251 -
Work with designated UIC States on development
of a State ground water protection program
including an Underground Injection Control
(UIC) permit and enforcement program.
Issue Notices of Violation and initiate
appropriate follow up action in primacy
States that have not adequately enforced
the SDWA.
-------
1980/1981 SOLID K!ASTE MEDIA GUIDANCE
-------
SOLID WASTE
MEDIA OVERVIEW
The Solid Waste Media is concerned with the national
management of three Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) programs: the Subtitle C (hazardous waste) program;
the Subtitle D program for the management of wastes not
classified as hazardous; and the Technical Assistance Panels
program, designed to support the two foregoing efforts by
providing implementation assistance.
Media Priorities
The first priority of the Solid Waste Media is the
national management of the hazardous waste program. All
Subtitle C regulations are expected to be promulgated by
December 31, 1979, and to become effective in July 1980.
The major hazardous waste activities of the Solid Waste
Media are responding to emergencies (highest priority),
issuing guidance for implementing the regulations, assisting
in the defense of the regulations against court challenges,
authorizing and overseeing State programs, conducting
Federal enforcement activities, and identifying, evaluating
and enforcing against facilities which may pose imminent
hazards (to be referred to as problem sites).
The second priority is the national management of the
Subtitle D program. In 1980, high priority activities will
include management of the land disposal site inventory,
State program development and management of grants under the
President's Urban Policy program.
The third priority is the Technical Assistance Panels
program.
Plann_ir]g__ Assumptions
The Solid Waste Guidance for 1980 is based upon the
1980 President's Budget. This budget does not include
adequate resources to handle the priority activities listed
earlier. There are substantial resource shortages in many
areas, but particularly for identifying, evaluating and
enforcing against abandoned or problem hazardous waste
sites. There are, however, several uncertainties regarding
resources for handling abandoned or problem sites that could
significantly alter this Guidance. This section will describe
the assumptions used within the limits of the 1980 President's
budget, and will also describe in some detail the uncertainties
that exist regarding resources for solid waste in FY 1980.
-------
- 256 -
Base Level Assumptions
o Schedule of Regulations:
Promulgation
Section of RCRA Date
3001, 3002, 3003, 3004 12/31/79
3005, 3006 10/31/79
4004 and 1008(a)(3) 07/31/79
1008(a)(1) 01/31/80
4002(b) 06/30/79
405 (Clean Water Act) 08/31/80
0 FY 1980 Grant Levels:
Hazardous waste - $18,600,000
Solid waste - $10,000,000
Urban Policy program - $13,950,000
(See Table 1 for State allocations)
0 Subtitle D grant funding:
Declining at a rate of $2 million
per year for 5 years
To fund high priority activities
only (inventory, State regulatory
program, State plan development)
No pass-through unless clearly
supporting high priority activities
0 Permitting function will be split in all
budget documents (irrespective of Regional
organization)
Abatement and Control will handle
technical reviews
Enforcement will handle administrative
processing and compliance monitoring
-------
- 257 -
FY 1?80 Statr Grant Allocations
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
DISTRICT OF COLU'IBIA
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
NEW JERSEY
NEW MEXICO
•NEW YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
SOUTH CAROLINA
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
WEST VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
AMERICAN SAMOA
GUAM
PUERTO RICO
NORTHERN MARIANAS
VIRGIN ISLANDS
Subtitle C
362,323
160,146
235,348
125,736
1,472,562
183,604
222,084
93,000
93,000
433,414
316,944
93,000
103,044
870,108
572,880
173,724
164,610
322,524
610,080
93,000
253,890
395,994
761,856
223,385
127,224
290,160
106,764
93,136
93,000
93,000
553,722
93,000
1,043,083
365,118
93,000
1,015,188
172,794
245,334
1,014,816
121,272
272,862
93,000
478,020
1,855,722
119,040
93,000
237,150
271,932
343,542
353,028
93,000
93,000
93,000
105,276
93,000
93,000
Subtitle D
159,100
50,000
81 ,300
88,300
921 ,300
102,000
140,000
50,000
50,000
313,500
212,000
50,000
50,000
513,400
239,900
130,500
103,800
148,700
167,700
50,000
181,200
262,800
410,000
175,800
102,400
216,000
50,000
68,500
50,000
50,000
331,100
50,000
842,400
234,700
50,000
492,000
118,200
96,500
544,900
50,000
119,700
50,000
181,200
517,200
50,000
50,000
214,700
157,500
80,600
204,100
50,000
50,000
50,000
125,300
50,000
50,000
C D
REGION I 1,018,350 602,800
REGION II 1,795,086 1,348,800
REGION III 2,035,398 1,121,400
REGION IV 2,728,434 1,471,400
REGION V 3.79,'i, 446 2,035,200
REGION VI 2.857,332 941,900
REGION VII 721,680 518,800
REGION VIII 693.408 352,000
REGION IX 2,173,410 1,253,600
REGION X 78.0,456 354,100
TOTAL 18,600,000 10,000,000
TOTAL
18,600,000 10,000,000
-------
- 258 -
0 Penalty policies, enforcement strategies
and implementation plans will be prepared
during FY 1980
0 No specific funding is provided in 1980
President's budget for the discovery and
evaluation of abandoned and problem hazardous
waste sites
1979 Reprogramming -- Although no specific funds have
been provided in either the 1979 or 1980 budget for the
discovery, evaluation and enforcement activities associated
with abandoned hazardous waste sites, considerable
activity of this type is presently ongoing. It has
been estimated that approximately 30 workyears of
effort are being expended on this activity, utilizing
Headquarters and Regional solid waste enforcement, and
surveillance and analysis resources. The effort is not
spread evenly among the Regions, but appears to be
related to the number of problem sites per Region.
Two enforcement cases related to problem or
abandoned sites have currently been filed, and eight
more are expected within FY 1979. In the next 18
months, it is anticipated that another 12 to 18 cases
will be evaluated, and remedied either through voluntary
action by the owner or through Federal and/or State
actions, including litigation. An increase in resources,,
estimated at an additional 20 manyears of effort, will
likely be expended on this effort. This would bring
the total Regional effort on problem abandoned sites to
50 manyears. It appears that even without official
recognition of this priority charge, the current
reprogrammed resources will continue to function on the
abandoned site problem. This implies, however, that
resources will be unavailable to implement the regulatory
program.
Request for Supplemental Funds — EPA is requesting
supplemental resources of $108.8 million and 113 positions
for FY 1980 to undertake an active program of discovering
and investigating, as well as responding to emergency
actions and conducting enforcement actions concerning
abandoned and inactive hazardous waste facilities that
present an imminent hazard to public health or the
environment.
The proposed program will have five parts: discovery,
reconnaissance investigation, full investigation,
enforcement and where essential, emergency action. The
program will be implemented by the EPA's Regions and,
in fact, by the States wherever possible. To accomplish
-------
- 259 -
this, EPA has already established a new institutional
structure of national and Regional coordinators and has
issued a change in programmatic priorities that will
result in the reprogramming of approximately 50 workyears
into this program. Also, EPA is preparing to convene a
three-day workshop to orient the appointed coordinators
and train participating personnel. Although EPA has
some experience in acting on abandoned/inactive site
incidents, the techniques for investigating cases,
protecting the safety of investigating personnel,
documenting data and preparing cases are still to be
perfected and many of the personnel that will be investigating
and bringing enforcement action on abandoned/inactive
sites will need additional training and experience.
The discovery of abandoned/inactive sites will
basically involve receiving (or otherwise obtaining)
and recording leads on suspected sites. Currently
there is no formal mechanism for the discovery of
problem sites. Most of the known problem sites have
been identified through informal communications with
States and through citizen complaints. This portion of
the program will systematize the documentation of
information received from various sources. It will
also involve several low-cost efforts to search for
undiscovered sites. The discovery component of the
program will be institutionalized and carried out
throughout the 18 months of the program and thereafter.
The reconnaissance investigation component of
the program will involve making a preliminary investigation
of those sites identified as suspected problem sites in
the discovery phase of the program. Supplemental funds
of $1.5 million in FY80 are requested for this work.
The full investigation component of the program
involves conducting extensive field investigations, in-depth
sampling and analysis, and other related studies on
sites identified by the reconnaissance investigation as
being potential significant hazards.
It is projected that approximately 300 sites can
and should be investigated over the next 18 months. At
a cost of 5.5 workyears per site, this workload (930
workyears) would far exceed the current resource capacity
of EPA and would even exceed EPA's capacity to hire and
train personnel if additional personnel were authorized.
Accordingly, it is proposed to use as many as 30 contractors
under level-of-effort contracts to supplement State and
-------
- 260 -
Regional resources under case-by-case task orders to
conduct full investigations. There are contractors
available for such an effort.
It is assumed that 225 sites can be investigated
by the States, but with varying amounts of EPA assistance
from the above-described contracts. The remaining 75
sites would be fully investigated by EPA also using
contractors. It is further assumed that all of this
effort would be performed in FY 1980 following discovery
and reconnaissance activities in FY 1979. Using these
assumptions, the full investigation component of the
program will cost $53.2 million. To manage the contractual
effort, and provide quality assurance, a limited number
of in-house experts, 43 additional positions and $1.7
million will be required. Accordingly, supplemental
resources of 43 positions and $54.9 million are requested
for FY 1980.
The enforcement component of the program will
involve bringing suits to require responsible parties
to take corrective actions. This phase encompasses the
preparation of legal cases and the additional technical
work and investigations necessary to support such
cases. It is assumed that following full investigations,
the States will assume responsibility for enforcement
action through State courts in 50 cases, with varying
amounts of EPA assistance, and that EPA will pursue
action on 50 cases under Federal authorities. Using
workload experience to date in similar enforcement
actions, 60 additional personnel and $2.4 million will
be required in supplemental funding for FY 1980.
The emergency response component of the program
will involve Federal funding of clean-up actions deemed
necessary to immediately contain extremely hazardous
situations. This will include action such as the
removal of drums of chemical wastes from navigable
waters and drainages into navigable waters (e.g.,
Louisville, Kentucky), the segregation and removal of
drums of chemicals that pose a fire or explosion threat
or which are leaking into the environment, and the
temporary containment of subsurface migration of toxic
chemicals through the construction of drains or other
means (e.g., Love Canal). These actions will not cover
permanent remedy. They will be employed where
a responsible party is not available or refuses to take
the emergency action. Whenever possible, recovery of
costs will be sought from available responsible parties.
Also, enforcement/injunction actions will be concurrently
taken wherever possible.
-------
- 261 -
Of the projected 300 sites that will be fully
investigated, it is assumed that 20 sites will require
critical emergency response. At an assumed average
cost of $2 million, $40 million will be required. It
is proposed that 75 percent of these 20 emergency actions
can be taken under the response authority of Section
311 of the Clean Water Act and that the remainder will
have to be addressed under Section 504 of that Act.
Accordingly, $30 million is requested to supplement the
Section 311 fund and $10 million is requested to fund
the Section 504 authority. Five additional positions
are requested to manage these clean-up actions which
are very complex and long-term compared to oil and
hazardous materials spills.
In addition, it is assumed that at least five
sites will require emergency response requiring application
of innovative technology. The La Bounty site in
Charles City, Iowa, is a good example. To deal with
these situations, 5 additional positions and $10 million
are requested.
In summary, 10 positions and $50 million are
requested for emergency response actions.
Overall, the following supplemental resources are
requested for the proposed program:
FY 1980
Component pos $1,000
Discovery
Reconnaissance Investigation - 1,500
Full Investigation 43 54,900
Enforcement 60 2,400
Emergency Response 10 50,000
TIT 108,800
It should be noted that this proposed 18 month
program is designed to address only a small part (300)
of the estimated potential universe of significantly
hazardous abandoned/inactive sites. Continuing activity
beyond FY 1980, at the same or higher level, is expected.
-------
- 262 -
HEADQUARTERS PLAN
Abatement and Control
In Fiscal Year 1980, the Office of Solid Waste will
undertake a new programmatic direction. Most of the major
regulations under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
will be promulgated by January 1980. With the promulgation
of these regulations, OSW will move into an implementation
phase of its hazardous and non-hazardous waste programs.
The national management of Subtitle C requirements will
continue to be the highest priority during FY80 and 81.
Major activities will include developing program guidance
for implementing the regulations; providing oversight of and
assistance to the State delegation program; providing technical
support for the litigation expected after the regulations
are promulgated; and developing guidance and guidelines for
specific industries and special wastes.
FY80 will begin the five-year phase down of Federal
financial assistance under Subtitle D of RCRA. The Headquarters
program will concentrate on national management of the
disposal site inventory; litigation support for promulgated
regulations; development of sludge management regulations;
and development of guidelines and manuals to assist Regional
Offices and the States in their control of non-hazardous
wastes.
National management of the technical assistance program,
the President's Urban Policy resource recovery program, and
evaluations of existing resource recovery technologies will
continue as at present.
Plans and Emphasis
o Subtitle C Activities
OSW will concentrate on promulgating the
Subtitle C regulations during the first
quarter of FY80. Upon promulgation of the
regulations, we expect that a significant
number of law suits will be filed. Two areas
where significant litigation support will be
necessary are: (1) proposals of additional
listing and de-listing of hazardous wastes
under Section 3001, and (2) defense and
revisions of facility standards under Section
3004 of RCRA. OSW will devote efforts to
this throughout FY80 and 81.
-------
- 263 -
OSW will also .be refining and developing
additional technical guidance documents under
Section 3004, outlining appropriate treatment,
scorage and disposal methods for specific
wastes, and will be considering amendments to
Section 3001 lists and criteria.
Day-to-day guidance will be provided to
Regional and State solid waste officials on
technical and procedural requirements of the
promulgated regulations,
Depending on Congressional action on our
proposed legislation, OSW will develop regulations
for a program to provide funds for dealing
with the problems of inactive and abandoned
disposal sites posing a threat to public
health or the environment. OSW will concentrate
on this activity during the latter part of
FY80.
o Subtitle^ D Activities
In FY80; OSW will provide consultation for and
national program management of the land
disposal site inventory, including training
sessions to facilitate Regional and State
understanding of the Section 4004 requirements.
The first inventory will be compiled and
published in January 1981. OSW anticipates
that litigation could also occur in response
to the Section 4004 regulations. In the
event challenges occur, OSW will devote
oir.s toward response.
Guidelines under Section 1008 for landfilling
will be promulgated in January 1980. Guidelines
wii.l be proposed for surface impoundments and
specific design and operating manuals and
monitoring manuals will be developed in FY80
to accompany these guidelines.
EPA will prcpcse regulations for sludge
management uncle c Section 405 of the Clean
Water Act during ?Y79. Promulgation is
scheduled for August 30, 1980, In FY81,
efforts will J:>e concentrated on possible
1 i~c iga.t..Lon in response to these regulations.
OSW will also provide consultation with the
Regions, and develop and issue a variety of
guidance documents to accompany these regulations
-------
- 264 -
Technical Assistance Activities
National program management of the president's
Urban Policy resource recovery grant program
will be provided by OSW during FY80 and 81.
Headquarters will maintain an oversight
responsibility for the financial and programmatic
aspects of the Urban Policy program.
Technical evaluations of resource recovery
systems will continue. Three or four in-
depth evaluations will be conducted in each
FY80 and 81.
National program management of the Technical
Assistance Program will be provided by OSW
during FY80 and 81, although little, if any,
direct technical assistance will be provided.
Federal procurement guidelines will be promulgated
in FY80 for fly ash as a cement supplement,
recycled paper products and composted sewage
sludge as a soil conditioner/fertilizer.
Guidelines will be proposed for recycled
construction materials and insulation products
using recovered materials.
Public Participation/Information
The four-year public education program on
RCRA implementation, Waste Alert, will continue
during FY80 and 81. The program will include
Regional and State conferences, and the
development and distribution of information
materials. The problem of siting, which is
an impediment to rapid improvement of solid
waste disposal practices, will be an area of
major emphasis in this program. Training
modules will be available in 1980 to orient
new Federal and State employees to RCRA
regulations and requirements.
Changes
o Reorganization
In anticipation of implementation of the
hazardous and non-hazardous waste programs,
the Office of Solid Waste will undergo a
reorganization. The new organization will
provide a balance of responsibilities among
the divisions, the bulk of which center on
the Subtitle C regulations. It will also
-------
- 265 -
concentrate on meeting both short-term and
future requirements outlined in the regulations
and other policies, and facilitate integration
and coordination of related efforts. As an
example, the development of control technologies
and disposal alternatives for both hazardous
and non-hazardous wastes will be handled by a
single organizational unit.
The new organization will be composed of
three divisions. The State Programs and
Resource Recovery Division will provide
integrated guidance and assistance to Regional
offices, States and local governments as
EPA implements RCRA's regulations and programs.
The Land Disposal Division will be responsible
for a national program to control the disposal
of all solid and hazardous wastes. The
Hazardous and Industrial Waste Division will
characterize and list wastes under Section
3001, provide regulations and guidelines for
the storage, treatment and recovery of industrial
wastes, and manage economic and environmental
assessments of Subtitles C and D of RCRA.
The Management and Information Staff will
continue to be responsible for basic budget,
planning, analysis and administrative functions;
public participation and education activities;
and production and dissemination of technical
information.
RCRA Amendments
EPA will submit proposals to Congress in
FY79 for amendments to RCRA. This is also
necessitated by OSWs new programmatic direction,
along with the increased understanding of
problems of hazardous and non-hazardous waste
management. Of the number of amendments to
be proposed, the major ones include:
Funding mechanisms to deal with post-
closure costs and liabilities of permitted
hazardous waste facilities.
Strengthening the Federal enforcement
capability by authorizing the Administrator
to take immediate action against violators
of hazardous waste provisions and regulations
without 30 days notice to the violator
or the State.
-------
- 266 -
Extending funding authorization beyond
1979 to ensure implementation of the
mandates of RCRA and the promulgated
regulations.
Enforcement
Plans and Emphases — In FY 1980 the solid waste enforcement
program will emphasize taking enforcement actions in
imminent hazard situations involving substantial threats
to public health or the environment and in developing a
long-term national program to evaluate the industrial
waste disposal practices engaged in by selected companies,
industries or geographical areas. A second broad
priority will be the development of regulations and
enforcement policies. This will include the development
of a plan for enforcement under the overall regulatory
program, and appropriate enforcement strategies (including
priority setting) for monitoring compliance with standards
imposed upon persons who generate, transport, store,
treat or dispose of hazardous waste. Thirdly, assistance
will be provided to the Regions in reviewing and concurring
in authorizing State hazardous waste programs. Fourthly,
Headquarters will assist OSW in establishing necessary
ADP capability. Finally, Headquarters staff will be •
responsible for concurring in specific Regional enforcement
actions, and in developing necessary program policies
and guidance.
In FY 1981, emergency response and imminent hazard
action from the investigation of abandoned/inactive
hazardous waste disposal sites will continue as the
most important priority. Other priorities will include
policy development, guidance development, preparation
of Solid Waste Enforcement Policy Statements, and
assisting with State program oversight and operating
programs for unauthorized States.
Changes — In FY 1980, the Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Enforcement Division, in which the solid waste enforcement -«
program resides, will undergo a reorganization. The
four present branches (three pesticides-related and one
for toxic substances and solid waste) will be realigned
into three branches. Each branch will discharge duties
along functional rather than media lines. There will
be branches for policy and strategy development,
compliance monitoring, and case development and litigation.
Each branch will consist of two sections with more
narrowly-defined duties. All branches will be responsible
for the pesticides, toxic substances, and solid waste
enforcement programs within their functional areas.
-------
- 267 -
Research and Development
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act requires
that hazardous waste be identified, separated and managed
so as to assure environmental protection. Because of the
relatively small amount of research in the past, the
information available on the quantities and characteristics
of hazardous wastes and on the costs and capabilities of
environmental control options is limited.
The awareness of and concern over hazardous wastes
has increased very substantially. As the Agency has moved
to use the authorities of the new legislation, information
on the actual size of the hazardous waste problem has
begun to be available. Several aspects emerge as parti-
cularly acute. First, an appreciation has developed for
the number and size of unaccpetable facilities that are
now in operation or have been abandoned. Second, the long
term environmental consequences of storage~i disposal or
destruction alternatives is quite uncertain. The costs of
these different alternatives can vary considerably. Third,
a desirable degree of general knowledge or accuracy in
characterizing wastes and control options does not exist.
At the present time each individual waste and the proposed
management practices must be evaluated separately to
establish costs and performance. Without detailed studies
in each specific case, projections of acutal operating
characteristics are presently impossible. Fourth, as the
requirements and costs for managing hazardous wastes
increase, present waste generation patterns and practices
will change. Our understanding of how waste generators,
transporters, and disposers will respond to increased
costs are limited. For example, a regional liquid and
solid waste management facility may be the least expensive
and most effective option for metal plating and finishing
firms. However, the costs of a facility designed for an
existing situation may affect the economics of these firms
enough to change their operations.
The purpose of this section is to present issues and
questions inherent in the current planning of EPA's research
effort in hazardous waste management. The concerns raised
here are meant to stimulate thought and discussion to produce
a better designed and executed research and development
program.
-------
- 268 -
Program Office Views on Research and Development
The Office of Solid Waste has not and does not rely
upon or assign high priority to research in solving the
hazardous waste problem. Their position is founded upon
four separate points.
o Effective programs for dealing with hazardous
wastes and rectifying unaccepatable or abandoned
sites will cost tens of billions of dollars.
The technological problens in establishing
these programs are remarkably small compared with
the problems of obtaining the necessary financial
and institutional commitment.
o The Office of Management and Budget has decided
that EPA will not undertake a grant program to
either plan or site hazardous waste facilities
or to finance their construction.
o RCRA calls upon EPA to establish rules for the
disposal of future wastes. Research results will
not be available on a schedule compatible with the
legislated requirement. Resources to generate the
information for rule making are S20 million less
than that required, resources for research should
therefore be minimal.
o Research and development efforts cannot yield
results quickly enough to respond to the problems
of abandoned or unacceptable facilities. These
facilities must be addressed with presently available
technology.
Is objective information available that establishes that
aspects of dealing with the hazardous v/astes are, in fact,
critically limited by lack of knowledge? Are there cogent
reasons to believe that Federal R&D should generate that
knowledge?
Research Required
An effective research program for solving the problems of
managing hazardous wastes must address a variety of subjects.
Planning such a program must systematically identify these
problems. One approach is to divide the research into three
general areas:
-------
- 269 -
o The costs and capabilities of alternative hazardous
wastes disposal options are not well documented.
Options include storage or landfilling, fixation,
detoxification, and incineration. Efficient pro-
cedures for dealing with various types of wastes
have not been demonstrated.
o The characteristics and quantities of wastes from
various sources have not been well documented. The
properties of wastes that must be known to allow safe
and effective disposal have not been catalogued in
a comprehensive fashion.
o Regional hazardous waste problems at abandoned,
existing and future sites nay differ. Techniques
have yet to be developed that will lead to efficient
regional waste management or minimization systems.
What structure should be used in planning a research and
development program? What types of problems and activities
should be included?
Other Solid Waste Research
ORD's research program now includes activities in both
hazardous and municipal solid waste. In addition, the
activities are directed to defining environmental problems
as well as to solving them. The problem definition research
activities include health effects, measurement and environ-
mental assessment. The problem-solving activity includes
technology research, development, demonstration, evaluation
and technology transfer.
Is the scope of research program inappropriate? Should
research on specific topics be terminated? Should research
be initiated on new topics?
Research Management
At the present time, three separate laboratories conduct
research on solving hazardous wastes. The mission of the two
lERL's is defined by industrial sector and deals with all
environmental problems, including hazardous wastes. Within
the lERL's the organizational structure follows industrial
sectors. At the MERL solid wastes are assigned to a single
division and the division's structure reflects alternative
control technolgies.
-------
ORD has not specifically addressed the problems of
designing a research program on hazardous wastes and has
not clarified divisions between organizations' respon-
sibility. How might such a clarification be accomplished.
What structure should be used in planning a research
and development program? What types of problems and
activities should be included?
Research Planning
The Office of Research and Development is reexamining
thoroughly all of its present research in solid waste and
the emerging R&D needs of the Agency. This examination
includes all facets of research and development activity and
will not be restricted to present, or proposed technology
program.
The activities will be divided into categories:
Municipal Solid Wastes
Waste-as-Fuel (Energy Funding)
Health Research
Transport and Fate of Pollutants
Quality Assurance, Measurement and Monitoring
High Volume Mining Wastes
High Volume Energy Wastes (Energy Funding)
Thermal Decompostion
Hazardous Waste Treatment
Containment
Waste Characterization
Regional Hazardous Waste Management
Abandoned Facilities Response
Documents are being developed in each area that will
define the research needs, goals and outputs. These
documents also define alternative program levels in each of
the thirteen areas. The Office of Solid Waste and other
interested parties will evaluate and rank the program
options. This ranking will provide the direction for the
FY-80 and FY-81 research programs.
-------
- 271 -
REGIONAL GUIDANCE
Abatement and Control
In Fiscal Year 1980 and 1981, the Regions will be
required to play a major implementation role in the manage-
ment of RCRA's mandated programs. Emergency response and
management and oversight of State hazardous waste program
development and operation will be the Regions' highest
priorities throughout FY80 and 81. The major activities
include enabling States to qualify for full or interim
authorization; overseeing authorized State programs; handling
notification activities; notifying on interim permit status;
and assisting in response to emergencies and imminent hazards.
Oversight and assistance in the development of State
Subtitle D programs will also continue. Major activities
will include managing the disposal site inventory; managing
development and implementation of State regulatory powers;
managing the resource recovery grants awarded under the
President's Urban Policy program; and overseeing the State
planning process. The Regions will also continue to operate
the Technical Assistance Panels programs.
Subtitle C Activities
The highest priority under Subtitle C for FY 1980 and
81 will be to work aggressively with the States to enable as
many as possible to qualify for full or interim authorization.
EPA Regions will concentrate during the first three quarters
of FY 1980 on assisting the States to develop appropriate
legislation and regulations, set up operating programs, and
write applications for authorization. During the second
through fourth quarters, Regions will review and approve or
deny applications for authorization. These efforts are
essential if we are to maximize the number of States authorized
early in the program. In FY 1981, oversight of authorized
State programs will be of equal priority. Particularly fox-
States with interim authorization, it will be important to
verify that the regulations are being administered as intended
and that the States are continuing to develop their programs
so that they can move toward obtaining full authorization.
In FY 1980 and 81, EPA Regions will begin to administer
those portions of the Subtitle C regulations for which EPA
has responsibility. Specifically, this means notification
for all States in FY 1980 and review of manifest reports and
issuance of permits for unauthorized States in FY 1981.
-------
- 272 -
Section 3010 regulations originally provided limited
interim authorization to allow States to handle notification
activities. It has now been decided that the Regions will
handle all notification activities. Insufficient resources
are currently available for notification activities. It is
expected that notifications will be handled with a combina-
tion of other-than-permanent-full-time employees and contract
dollars obtained through the Agency's overtarget process.
All notifications must be submitted to Regional Offices in
the 90 days from January 1 to March 31, 1980.
Part A of the permit applications are due no later than
180 days after the Section 3001 regulations are promulgated.
As the current projection for promulgation is December 30,
1979, the Part A applications are due by the end of June
1980. Notices of interim permit status must be issued to
all applicants, and the Part A applications ranked. The
ranking is the basis for determining when the full permit
application (Part B) is due. Requests from the Regional
Administrator for submission of Part B must provide a
minimum of 6 months for preparation. It may be possible to
initiate work on some permits in FY 1980. The full permit
process will not begin, in most cases, until FY 1981.
The regulations describing the manifest system will
become effective June 31, 1980. The quarterly manifest
exception reports and annual manifest reports from hazardous
waste generators are not due until 30 days after the close
of each quarter or the close of each year, making the first
reports (both annual and quarterly) due October 31, 1980.
Therefore, review of manifest reports also will not begin
until FY 1981.
The third major area of responsibility under Subtitle
C will be to assist in responding to emergencies and imminent
hazards. The lead responsibility for emergencies, i.e., a
sudden, urgent, unforeseen occurrence requiring immediate
action, will rest with the Oil and Hazardous Response Teams.
The responsibility of the Solid Waste Branches will be to
provide technical advice on containing the hazardous sub-
stance to mitigate the emergency; assist in finding a permanent
remedy; and follow up to assure that the remedy is applied
and is effective. Under imminent hazard situations, those
where legal action has been taken or is contemplated by the
Office of Enforcement, the Regional Solid Waste Branches
will assist OE by making technical evaluations and will help
in developing evidential data. The Office of Enforcement
has the lead for developing imminent hazard cases. In
FY 1980 the Regions will continue to actively seek out,
-------
- 273 -
identify, and screen hazardous waste sites to determine
whether they pose a threat to public health or the environment.
Those suspected of constituting an imminent hazard should be
referred to the Office of Enforcement for appropriate legal
action. Technical remedies should be proposed for these
sites. However, for those sites for which there is no
financially responsible party, unless and until Congress
approves legislation for a clean-up fund, Federal funding
will not be available to implement appropriate remedies.
Subtitle D Activities
Grant funds to the States under Subtitle D (which will
be awarded under State/EPA Agreements) will be phased out
over a five year period starting in FY 1980. During this
five year period, States will be encouraged to develop self-
supporting programs based on a system of user charges. The
decreased level of Federal funding will not provide for
addressing all the objectives of Subtitle D. Federal funds
will be directed toward funding only the highest priority
activities under Subtitle D - the open dump inventory;
development and implementation of State non-hazardous waste
regulatory programs; and substantial forward progress in
development of State solid waste plans. Local and Regional
planning and implementation will be a low priority in FY
1980 and 81. Grants under Section 4008 (a) (1) will be made
for those purposes only if maximum progress on the high
priority activities is being achieved. Beyond FY 1981, we
anticipate that no Federal funds will be available for local
and regional planning and implementation.
The three major activities in FY 1980 and 81 under
Subtitle D will be to manage the disposal site inventory,
oversee the development of State regulatory powers, and
manage the Urban Policy grants. The first installment of
the inventory is expected to be published in January 1981.
The Regions will assist the States in developing inventory
protocols and will monitor conduct of the inventory. As
Headquarters will merely be compiling and publishing the
lists sent by the Regions, a particularly important aspect
of inventory management will be to monitor State inventory
activities. This should include a thorough review of State
inventory procedures and occasional site visits with State
personnel to land disposal facilities to ascertain that
facility evaluation procedures are being accurately followed.
A site classification manual and additional guidance will be
issued to help the States classify facilities and to help
the Regions evaluate State inventory programs. A review of
State regulatory powers will be undertaken, and actions to
help the States remedy deficiencies will be taken, as necessary,
-------
- 274
By the end of FY 1979, 40 to 60 grantees will have been
selected and work plans approved under the Urban Policy
Grant program. In FY 1980, the Regions will manage these
grants; help select an additional 40 to 60 grantees (some of
which will be continuing projects started in FY 1979); and
work with the new grantees to develop acceptable work plans.
The same activities are anticipated for FY 1981, and by the
end of that year there will be 60 to 80 active grants.
Contractors will be available to assist in the management of
these grants.
Technical Assistance Activities
Management of the technical assistance program will
continue as at present. Except in rare circumstances,
Headquarters will not provide direct technical assistance
beyond FY 1979. In FY 1980 and beyond, assistance will be
provided solely by contractors, peer match, or Regional
staff. Demand for technical assistance has, to date, been
lower than expected. Regions are encouraged to use the
Panels as a supplementary resource when assisting in the
development and operation of State hazardous and non-hazardous
waste regulatory programs. The Panels should be used inno-
vatively whenever possible for State hazardous waste programs
and for conducting the inventory. They may also be used to
provide help to Regions in managing Urban Policy grants.
Enforcement
In FY 1980 and 1981 the Regional Offices will have as
their most important activity the taking of enforcement
actions in situations involving substantial threats to
health or the environment. A second important activity will
be compliance monitoring of all hazardous waste handlers to
insure that all such persons have notified EPA of their
activities. The Regions will work to encourage voluntary
compliance with provisions of RCRA on the part of industry
through contacts with industry and State representatives.
Procedures for enforcement oversight in authorized States
and Federal enforcement operations in unauthorized States
will be established. State hazardous waste management plans
will be reviewed for enforcement adequacy and compliance
with the RCRA manifest system will be monitored.
Since regulations will not be in place and enforceable
until late in FY 1980, only minimal compliance monitoring
activities and initiation of enforcement actions will take
place through most of the year. The major compliance monitoring
priority for FY 1980 and 1981 will be to ensure that all
hazardous waste generators have notified and are properly
complying with the requirements of regulations under Section
3002. Most enforcement activities are expected to be conducted
-------
- 275 -
in response to emergency incidents or in accordance with the
affirmative action plan developed by Headquarters to determine
where imminent hazards may exist by investigating selected
companies, industries, or geographical areas.
-------
- 276 -
PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS - Abatement and Control
(All are for 1980 and 1981 unless noted otherwise)
Solid Waste Management
*1. Number of State plans under review
*2. Number of State plans approved (by State)
*3. Number of Urban Policy grants being managed
Hazardous Waste Management
*1. Number of States receiving interim authorization
*2. Number of States receiving full authorization
*3. Number of notifications processed
*4. Number of notices of interim permit status
issued
*5. Number of emergencies for which assistance; was
provided
*6. Number of abandoned/problem sites identified
*°7. Number of reconnaissance investigations of
abandoned/problem sites (in process) (completed)
*°8. Number of full investigations of abandoned/problem
sites (in process) (completed)
*°9. Number of Part B applications (being) reviewed
for completeness (1981)
°10. Number of Part B applications being reviewed
for draft permit (1981)
*11. Number of draft permits issued (1981)
*°12. Number of Part B applications (in) (completed)
comment period (1981)
°13. Number of Part B applications being reviewed
for final permit issuance (1981)
*14. Number of final permits issued (1981)
*15. Number of special permits issued (1981)
*°16. Number of permit decisions appealed to the
Administrator (1981)
*°17. Number of permits (under) (completed) judicial
review (1981)
*18. Number of appealed permits issued (1981)
*19. Number of permits (in each unauthorized State)
suspended, denied, revoked (1981)
*20. Number of permits (in each unauthorized State)
modified (1981)
*21. Number of facilities (in each unauthorized State)
which were closed/ceased operation
*22. Number of State permit applications/draft permits
reviewed (in each authorized State)
*23. Number of State permit applications/draft permits
which were formally commented on (in each authorized
State)
-------
- 277 -
*24. Number of manifest exceptions (in each unauthorized
State)
*25. Number of international shipments (by receiving
country)
Technical Assistance
*1. Number of peer matches completed
*2. Number of contractor TA efforts completed
*3. Number of Regional personnel TA efforts completed
*4. Number of requests pending
*Quarterly and/or annual totals
°In process, as of (end of quarter and/or end of year)
-------
- 278 -
PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS - Enforcement "
(All are for 1980 and 1981 unless noted otherwise)
1. Number of imminent hazard actions initiated
pursuant to RCRA Section 7003
2. Number of civil court actions initiated under
RCRA Section 3Q08
3. Total number of inspections
Number of inspections of generators who
treat, store or dispose on-site
Number of inspections of generators who
treat, store or dispose off-site
- Number of inspections of treatment, storage
and disposal facilities
Number of inspections of transporters,
including inspections by DOT
4. Number of Notices of Violation issued
5. Number of Informal Notices of Warning sent
6. Number of compliance orders issued under RCRA
Section 3008
7. Number of administrative/enforcement hearings
held pursuant to RCRA Section 3008
8. Number of criminal prosecutions initiated
9. Number of state emergency actions initiated
10. Number of activities conducted so as to promote
voluntary compliance on the part of industry
with RCRA requirements
11. Number of state oversight inspections (1981)
12. Number of state plans for interim authorization
reviewed for adequacy of enforcement
13. Number of state plans for full authorization
reviewed for adequacy of enforcement
14. Number of violations detected
15. Number of sites determined to pose an imminent
hazard
16. Number of sites which have begun to come into
compliance
-------
1980/1981 TOXIC SUBSTANCES MEDIA GUIDANCE
-------
TOXIC SUBSTANCES
MEDIA OVERVIEW
Planning Assumptions
The FY 1980 toxic substances abatement and control'
program activities and outputs are based on assumptions
about resource status and on program activity level.
The significant programmatic assumptions are related
to actions external to the toxic substances program.
The major one is that we will receive 400 premanufacture
notifications annually for review. We expect that the
Interagency Testing Committee will continue to make
recommendations for priority testing up to the statutory
limit of 50 chemicals. We are assuming that we will
receive industry substantial risk notifications at the
same rate as up to now. Requirements for industry
assistance are assumed to remain fairly constant
overall. We expect that many of the actions the
Agency takes initially will be the subject of petitions
and suits and that this will require significant pro-
gram effort to respond. We have assumed that section 28
State grant authority and funding authorizations will
not be extended beyond FY 1979 by Congress. We assume
that imminent hazard actions under TSCA section 7 will
be nonexistent or nearly so. These assumptions will also
apply to FY 1981. No legislative changes are assumed
for FY 1980.
Abatement and control resources for the Regions
will provide for a minimal program level. Only a
small amount of resources are provided for necessary
actions resulting from regulations. Coordinative
resources are provided for Regional integration, but
it is assumed that other media will provide resources
for activities to control toxic chemicals which are
being integrated. No resources are provided for toxic
chemical emergencies or other activities not required
to support legislatively mandated functions.
Output levels are based on the assumption that the
program operates at the full programmed resource
level in both FY 1979 and FY 1980. This assumes that
we will be able to locate, hire, and integrate into
our organization large numbers of people with neces-
sary skills and use our contract money effectively.
This in turn depends on having adequate space when
needed and necessary administrative support.
-------
- 282 -
Finally, because this is a new program, we
have had to base many output levels on models of
resource needs and projections of program design rather
than on actual experience.
The toxic substances enforcement program antici-
pates that by the end of FY 1980, the Agency will have
promulgated several TSCA section 4 testing standards,
including oncogenicity, chronic toxicity, and combined
oncogenicity and chronic toxicity standards. In addi-
tion, a section 4 testing rule, requiring the submis-
sion of test results data relating to health and
environmental effects, will have been promulgated and
20-30 chemicals selected for testing under this regu-
lation. Standards for providing test data in support
of a premanufacturing notice under section 5 will also
have been promulgated, and a number of section 5(e)
and 5(f) rules or orders will have been issued. An
additional section 6 rule is expected to become effective
by the end of FY 1980. Under section 8(a), the Agency
will have promulgated a use/exposure rule gathering
information on 2000-3000 chemicals. In addition to
individual section 8(a) information rules for a few
selected new chemicals, model rules will be issued under
sections 8(a), (c), and (d). Finally, regulations
governing the importation of chemicals will be in
place.
FY 1981 will bring additional chemical control
regulations under section 6. New section 4 testing
rules and new rules and orders under section 5(e) and
5(f) are also expected. Furthermore, additional
section 8(a) reporting regulations will be finalized
by the close of FY 1981.
The enforcement resources necessary to adequately
monitor compliance with these program activities will,
for the most part, be cumulative. We assume that
resource allocations to existing programs will decrease
with time. The net effect of the promulgation schedule,
however, will be to increase the demand for enforcement
resources.
-------
- 283 -
Research and development planning assumptions will
be identified through the research committee mechanism
which is being established presently for the toxic sub-
stances media.
Media Priorities
The FY 1980 and 1981 toxic substances programs re-
flect increasing levels of program activities and out-
puts. These expanding activities are based on the
necessary foundations for program operation such as a
chemical selection and priority setting system, assess-
ment process, premanufacture review process, including
testing guidelines for new chemicals, and data manage-
ment systems and capabilities for the most part being
in place and functioning. These activity levels also
require that expedited procedures be in place for such
activities as reporting and recordkeeping rulemaking
and for control actions on new chemicals, which must be
taken quickly in order to be effective.
In FY 1980, we will continue establishing these
toxic substances abatement and control program founda-
tions while more fully operating most aspects of the
program. We will put priority on making the premanufacture
review program fully operational, in order to review
new chemicals and take action on those that may be
hazardous before their release into the environment.
We will also emphasize development of rules to obtain
testing data upon which to make chemical assessments
in support of regulatory actions. We will begin to
increase our emphasis on control of existing chemicals
which are identified as hazards through our assessment
process. We will operate a priority setting system
for choosing chemicals for testing and regulation under
TSCA and other statutes, in conjunction with the Toxic
Substances Priorities Committee. In FY 1981, we will
emphasize full operation of all major program components.
We will place a balanced emphasis on regulation of new
and existing chemicals based upon the information base
we establish in FY 1979 and 1980. We will operate an
integrated priority setting system for choosing chemicals
for testing and regulation under TSCA and other statutes
in conjunction with the Toxic Substances Priorities
Committee. Public participation in these key programs
will be emphasized in both years.
-------
- 284 -
The Office of Enforcement will concentrate its
FY 1980 and FY 1981 resources on the enforcement of
those regulatory programs which provide the most
effective means of (a) abating threats to public
health or the environment due to chemical contami-
nants, (b) gathering accurate and comprehensive data
concerning the universe of potentially harmful sub-
stances, and (c) monitoring compliance with existing
standards to determine that regulated chemicals are
handled as required, and (d) assuring the integrity
of the regulatory program. Based on these criteria,
the following priority hierarchy has been established.
Emergency Response — Since emergency situations
by definition present a direct and substantial
threat to public health or the environment, co-
ordinating Agency response to such imminent
hazards will be the highest priority for the
Office of Enforcement. The Office of Enforcement
will bring actions under section 7 of TSCA
for such injunctive relief as may be necessary
to remedy the risk at hand. Moreover, the
Office of Enforcement will actively enforce the
requirement under TSCA section 8(e) that persons
immediately report any emergency incidents of
environmental contamination. Finally, every
effort will be made to use, where appropriate,
emergency response tools available under other
environmental statutes such as the Solid Waste
Disposal Act.
Premanufacture Notification - TSCA Section 5 —
Because the premanufacture notification require-
ment contained in section 5 of TSCA can be used
both to gather information and to reduce the
risk of hazardous chemicals being introduced into
commerce, monitoring compliance with this require-
ment is a high priority. The proper implementation
of the section 5 screening mechanism will allow
the Agency (a) to prevent hazardous substances
from reaching the marketplace, and (b) develop a
more accurate profile of the chemical industry.
-------
- 285 -
Chemical Control Actions - TSCA Sections 6, 5(e),
and 5(f) — Chemical control regulations con-
stitute the primary means by which the Agency
directly controls risks to public health and
the environment. Section 6 rules on PCBs, CFCs,
and any other substances in effect will receive
special attention. Since rules or orders
issued under TSCA section 5(e) and 5(f) (in con-
junction with the review of premanufacture notices)
also impose chemical-specific controls, the en-
forcement of the terms of such rules or orders
will receive the same priority as that assigned
to other chemical control enforcement activities.
Information Gathering - TSCA Sections 4 and 8 —
TSCA sections 4 and 8 provide the principal
authority for obtaining information regarding
chemical toxicity and exposure. Since a violation
of section 4 or section 8 does not directly
endanger health or the environment the enforcement
of these programs receives a lower ranking than
the compliance monitoring activities described
above. The Office of Enforcement recognizes,
however, that since the success of other TSCA
sections depends upon the integrity of the data
received under sections 4 and 8, the Office of
Enforcement must provide the resources necessary
to assure that the information received under
these programs is valid and complete.
Imported Chemicals Control - TSCA Section 13 —
A smaller portion of resources will be used
to inspect imported chemicals at U.S. ports of
entry. The Office of Enforcement will monitor
imported chemicals in cooperation with the U.S.
Customs Bureau. Developing a specific protocol
to control imported substances will also be a
part of the strategies devised to enforce each
of the programs listed above.
Federal Facility Enforcement — By the end of
FY 1980, it is expected that all, or almost all,
Federal facilities which are major sources will
be in compliance with applicable TSCA regulations
and most minor source Federal facilities will
also be in compliance. Regions should assure
-------
- 286 -
that all Federal facilities do indeed come into
compliance as soon as possible, and no later
than the end of FY 1980.
Apart from the enforcement of the substantive
mandates of TSCA, the Office of Enforcement will enhance
the efficiency of its compliance monitoring management
system during FY 1980 and 1981. Among the many pro-
grams which will be implemented to achieve this objec-
tive, the Office of Enforcement will focus on the
following activities.
Multi-Media Enforcement — The Office of
Enforcement plans to implement an intra-agency
multi-media approach to toxic substances enforce-
ment. As appropriate, the Office of Enforcement
will use both the enforcement tools and
the resources available under other EPA-
administered programs to integrate compliance
monitoring and enforcement activities.
Inter-Agency Cooperation — To further expand
inspectional resources, the Office of Enforcement
will work with participating agencies of the
Interagency Regulatory Liaison Group (IRLG) to
(a) develop cooperative joint, referral, and
crossover inspection programs, and (b) coordinate
complementary compliance monitoring programs.
Evaluation of the TSCA Enforcement Program —
The Office of Enforcement will continue to
evaluate and refine its compliance monitoring
and enforcement programs in FY 1981. As part
of this procedure, the Office of Enforcement
will establish a formal, automated system of
processing information generated through
compliance monitoring and enforcement activities.
It will also conduct a periodic review of
Regional programs and will establish a Regional
team to evaluate Headquarters performance.
Research and development priorities for toxic
substances will be established jointly by the research
committee participants.
-------
- 287 -
Major Objectives
The abatement and control program objectives are
to implement the Toxic Substances Control Act's
policy that (1) adequate data should be developed with
respect to the effect of chemicals on health and the
environment and that the development of such data should
be the responsibility of those who manufacture and
process the chemicals, and (2) adequate authority should
exist to regulate chemicals which present an unreasonable
risk of injury to health or the environment. These
objectives include the information related activities
of developing test standards and applying them to
specific chemicals by rule to obtain test data from
industry, establishing reporting and recordkeeping
requirements to obtain existing information on chemical
substances, setting requirements for submission of
information by industry on new chemicals and significant
new uses, monitoring for field data, implementing
and operating data management systems, and exchanging
nonconfidential information with other programs,
Federal agencies, States, public interest groups, and
the general public. It also includes scientific assess-
ments of effects, exposures, and risks for new and
existing chemicals based upon this information and
technical determinations of control options, including
economic considerations. Control related activities
include taking formal actions on the manufacturing,
processing, distribution, use, and disposal of new
and existing chemicals under TSCA authorities, refer-
ring action to other programs or agencies, and taking
nonregulatory approaches.
The fundamental objective of the toxic substances
enforcement program is to protect public health and
the environment from unreasonable risks posed by
chemical substances regulated under the Toxic Substances
Control Act. The risk abatement process will be
accomplished through:
(1) The implementation of a program to prevent
or respond to toxic substances emergencies and notices
of substantial risk,
(2) The achievement of compliance with the substan-
tive requirements of TSCA and regulations promulgated
thereunder,
-------
- 288 -
(3) Assuring that information gathered under TSCA
is accurate and complete so that correct assessments
of toxicity and exposure can be made, and
(4) The expansion of inspectional resources
and improvement of the TSCA enforcement management
system.
Research and development objectives will be
established through the research committee for toxic
substances.
-------
- 289 -
HEADQUARTERS PLANS
Abatement and Control
Plans and Priorities
Premanufacture Review
In FY 1980, as part of the priority
we place on premanufacture review of
new chemicals, our highest priority
objective will be to fully operate
the notification review process and
to take actions to prevent or control
the manufacture of new chemicals, as
required. A high priority objective
will be to promulgate the final test-
ing guidelines for premanufacture
notification. Another high priority
will be to further develop and begin
to use generic follow-up systems for
significant new use rules and
section 8(a) information rules for
new chemicals.
In FY 1981, our highest priority
objective will be to fully operate
the premanufacture notification proc-
ess at an improved level and con-
tinue to take control actions on
new chemicals as required. As a
high priority we will revise the
testing guidelines for premanufac-
ture notification to provide more
specific guidance. Another high
priority will be routine use of
generic follow-up systems for signi-
ficant new use rules and section 8(a)
information rules for new chemicals.
Testing
In FY 1980, as part of the priority
we place on development of testing
data, we will promulgate the test
rule proposed in FY 1979 and will
propose and promulgate additional
test rules. As a high priority we
will promulgate the full set of
-------
- 290 -
health effects test standards and
the fate and ecological effects test
standards proposed in FY 1979 and
will propose additional fate and
ecological effects test standards.
Other activities will include beginning
to review existing test standards.
In FY 1981, our highest priority
will be to continue promulgating
testing rules to obtain data in
support of assessment and regulation.
As a high priority we will complete
the fate and ecological effects test
standards and review existing test
standards.
Existing Chemicals
In FY 1980, our highest priority
will be to promulgate regulations
proposed in FY 1979 banning or limit-
ing the use of one chemical and to
propose regulations for several addi-
tional existing chemicals. A high
priority will be to develop proposed
regulations implementing generic
approaches to regulation of existing
chemicals.
In FY 1981, as our highest priority
we will promulgate and propose regu-
lations with greater emphasis on
generic approaches, banning or limit-
ing the use of a significantly greater
number of existing chemicals that
pose unreasonable risks to public
health.
Information
In FY 1980, our highest priority
will be to promulgate the section 8(a)
information rule on 2-3,000 chemicals
proposed in FY 1979. As a high pri-
ority we will propose and promulgate
model rules under section 8(a) and
will promulgate 8(c) and 8(d) model
rules. We will also publish the
revised chemical substances inventory
and will maintain the integrity of
-------
- 291 -
the inventory. Another high priority
will be to begin partial operation
of TSCA and interagency chemical
information systems and data bases
and to continue systems development.
In FY 1981, the highest priority
will be to continue promulgating
rules under section 8 to obtain data
to support assessment and regulation.
As a high priority we will complete
chemical information systems develop-
ment and operate systems, services
and data bases at full scale.
Regulations Support
In FY 1980, our highest priority
will be to conduct health and environ-
mental effects assessments, monitor-
ing and economic impact analyses to
support regulation of new and exist-
ing chemicals.
In FY 1981, our highest priority
will continue to be to conduct health
and environmental effects assessments,
monitoring and economic impact anal-
yses to support regulation of new and
existing chemicals.
Other Priority Activities
- In FY 1980, other priority activities
are to review and act expeditiously
on carcinogens, mutagens, and tera-
togens under section 4(f); begin
review of the overall economic and
innovation impacts of TSCA; assist
industry regarding toxics program
requirements; continue development of
public participation programs; and
support OECD and other planned inter-
national harmonization programs.
In FY 1981, other priority activities
are to continue actions under
section 4(f); maintain industry
assistance; continue TSCA overall
-------
- 292 -
economic and innovation impact studies;
operate public participation programs;
support international harmonization
programs; and evaluate and refine our
operating programs.
Changes — The FY 1980 headquarters abatement and
control program plans and priorities are consistent
with those outlined in the FY 1980 President's budget.
These plans and emphases represent a logical progres-
sion of FY 1979 activities into FY 1980 as the TSCA
program matures.
The major change for FY 1981 will be significantly
increased emphasis on control actions for existing
chemicals which will be based upon the information
and assessment activities emphasized in FY 1979
and 1980. Information, testing and assessment, acti-
vities will be maintained at the levels necessary
to support the greater number of control actions.
Alternatives — Alternatives which will be considered
in development of headquarters abatement and control
program plans and budgets include:
o Use of contracts, grants and interagency
agreements as a substitute or supplement
for inhouse resources
o Use of consultants, IPA's, interns and
other types of other-than-permanent
personnel to provide specialized skills
or fill temporary needs
o Use of other programs and agencies to
take action where most appropriate
o Use of regional and State/local expertise
where most effective
o Use of other program methods to accomplish
objectives more efficiently and effectively,
such as generic approaches to regulation,
expedited rulemaking, automated systems,
nonregulatory approaches to control, etc.
-------
- 293 -
Enforcement
Plans and Priorities — The following is a list of
priority Headquarters activities for FY 1980 and
FY 1981. It should be noted that Headquarters func-
tions will include specific participation in on-site
inspectional activities in such areas as enforcement
of premanufacture notification, enforcement of
section 8(e) requirements, and enforcement of
section 4 and 8 (a) requirements.
o First Priority
Coordinate response to toxic sub-
stances emergencies
- Ensure compliance with the section 8(e)
requirement to immediately inform the
Administrator of emergency incidents
of environmental contamination
Target facilities for compliance
monitoring under the premanufacture
notification requirement, and parti-
cipate in appropriate inspectional
activities
- Develop strategies for the enforce-
ment of premanufacture notification
and chemical control regulations.
o Second Priority
- Develop a multi-media compliance
monitoring and enforcement program
- Develop an outreach program and other
methods to induce voluntary compliance
with TSCA
Target facilities for compliance
monitoring activities under sections 4
and 8(a), and participate in appro-
priate inspectional activities
- Develop strategies for the enforce-
ment of the information-gathering
provisions of sections 4 and 8(a)
-------
- 294 -
Coordinate the development of coop-
erative inspectional programs between
IRLG member agencies
Evaluate and refine existing compli-
ance monitoring and enforcement
strategies and procedures
o Third Priority
- Actively participate in the TSCA
regulations-development process
Develop a strategy for the enforce-
ment of the section 13 import
regulations
- Identify areas of potential inter-
national cooperation in monitoring
the movement and control of toxic
substances
Develop an ADP system for processing
information received through compli-
ance monitoring and enforcement
activities.
In FY 1980 and FY 1981, the Headquarters toxic sub-
stances enforcement program will coordinate the res-
ponse to toxic substances emergencies and substantial
risk situations, and will actively pursue enforcement
actions in appropriate instances. Headquarters staff
will also participate in on-site inspectional functions
in enforcement of premanufacturing notification,
section 8(e) requirements, and section 4 and 8(«i)
requirements. Other priority programs will continue to
include establishing enforcement policy and providing
Regional guidance regarding compliance monitoring and
enforcement of chemical control regulations; developing
and implementing cooperative Headquarters/Regional com-
pliance monitoring strategies for the enforcement of
testing rules and premanufacturing notification require-
ments promulgated under TSCA; implementing a multimedia
enforcement approach as an integrated response to
chemical risk situations; assisting the Regions in
reviewing and providing concurrence on enforcement
litigation; and evaluating and refining existing TSCA
compliance monitoring strategies. Other activities
will include monitoring initial efforts to enforce
-------
- 295 -
import and export requirements, reporting requirements,
and conceiving and implementing outreach programs to
induce voluntary industry compliance. Increased coop-
eration will be sought in developing complementary
mechanisms to monitor the international movement and
control of toxic chemicals. Headquarters will conceive
and implement additional mechanisms for cooperative
compliance monitoring and enforcement through the IRLG.
The Headquarters toxic substances enforcement program
will establish and implement policies and operating
procedures for conducting all categories of inspec-
tions, assessing civil penalties, and preparing and
prosecuting civil and criminal cases. Finally, Head-
quarters will assist in the design and implementation
of an ADP system to record appropriate compliance and
enforcement information regarding firms subject to TSCA
regulations.
Protection of public health and the environment will
continue to be the criteria upon which compliance
monitoring and enforcement programs will be developed
in FY 1981. The toxic substances enforcement program
will expand in scope to monitor compliance with addi-
tional chemical control, testing, and information-
gathering regulations. Upon critical evaluation of
monitoring information developed in the execution of
the toxic substances enforcement program, a portion of
the compliance monitoring effort may be targeted to
firms, industries, or geographical areas which on the
basis of prior history of compliance, demonstrated
human or environmental risk, exposure, or epidemi-
ological data, warrant priority enforcement attention.
Additionally, such monitoring data will be used by
enforcement personnel to help focus future TSCA rule-
making activities.
Changes — This toxic substances enforcement guidance
has been changed to reflect revision of the Office of
Toxic Substances regulation-development calendar. This
revised calendar contains a different mix of rulemaking
activities than had been projected for FY 1980. In
addition, plans for the establishment of a cooperative
enforcement grant-in-aid program with the States,
expected to be initiated in FY 1979 and to continue
indefinitely thereafter, have been suspended. Insofar
as this program is not put into effect and the toxic
substances enforcement program is to be conducted
entirely by Federal personnel, adjustments in the
program plans and resource needs for this program in
FY 1980 and FY 1981 will have to be made.
-------
- 296 -
By FY 1980, the Pesticides and Toxic Substances Enforce-
ment Division will have undergone an internal reor-
ganization. The four present branches (three pesti-
cides-related and one for toxic substances solid waste)
will be realigned into three branches. The duties of
these branches will be assigned along functional rather
than media lines. There will be branches for policy
and strategy development, compliance monitoring, and
case development and litigation. Each branch will
consist of two sections with more narrowly-defined
duties. All branches will be responsible for the
development and management of pesticides, toxic sub-
stances, and solid waste enforcement programs within
their functional areas.
Alternatives — The Office of Enforcement is consider-
ing several alternative methods of discharging its
responsibilities under TSCA. Each alternative is
designed to maximize available resources, and thus
will impact the FY 1980/1981 ZBB process.
o Cooperative Agreements with the States —
The Office of Enforcement has considered
initiating a cooperative enforcement grant-
in-aid program with the States. Under such
a program, selected State agencies would
cooperate with EPA in monitoring compli-
ance with certain TSCA regulations. As
noted above, plans for the commencement of
this program are presently suspended.
o Contractor Support -- In many cases it may
be practicable to employ contractors to
assist EPA personnel in performing compli-
ance monitoring activities under the Act.
Contractors would complement Agency inspec-
tion teams by providing specialized exper-
tise in the detection and prosecution of
violations. Given adequate funding, the
use of contractors could significantly
augment existing inspection-related resources,
o Headquarters Affirmative Compliance
Monitoring — Evaluating the compliance
status of firms subject to certain TSCA
regulatory programs, (such as those under
TSCA sections 4, 5(a), and 8(e)), will
require sophisticated technical judgments
which will be made at Headquarters by the
-------
- 297 -
Office of Toxic Substances. Since Head-
quarters Enforcement is required to work
closely with the Office of Toxic Substances
in developing such cases, program efficien-
cies argue for vesting in Headquarters an
important part of the responsibility for
directing these compliance monitoring and
enforcement programs.
Research and Development
Plans and Priorities/Changes — In FY 1980 and and
FY 1981, EPA's R&D program will focus on three manage-
ment priorities:
o Continue the integration of ORD's research
into the Agency's activities.
o Enhance ORD's capability to improve the
scientific and technological data for future
Agency regulatory and enforcement actions.
o Improve the quality and utility of the
scientific and technical data used by the
Agency.
Plans for accomplishing these priorities include the
following:
o Establish research committees to oversee the
joint planning of all toxic substances
research in support of regulations and
enforcement. Three committees are proposed:
Pesticides established in FY 1978
(relating primarily to the Office of
Pesticide Programs).
Testing and Assessment to be estab-
lished in FY 1979 (relating primarily
to the Office of Testing and Evalua-
tion and the Office of Program Inte-
gration and Information).
Chemical Control, deferred (relating
primarily to the Office of Chemical
Control).
-------
- 298 -
These committees will develop multi-year
research strategies and will incorporate
requirements and reviews of the Regional
Offices. To accomplish this, it will be
necessary for the Regional Offices to coor-
dinate their participation and share respon-
sibility for representing Regional interests.
Review all longer-term research efforts
underway in ORD to assure that the best
scientific capabilities are being directed
toward the most important future problems.
Fifteen percent of ORD resources for toxic
substances R&D will be devoted to existing
and future broader-based, longer-term re-
search efforts to build an improved data
base.
Plan and implement the Agency's Public
Health Initiative which will provide an
integrated data base for assessing the
significance of human exposure and adverse
human health effects from chemicals and
chemical mixtures released into the
environment. This will include the estab-
lishment of a National Neurotoxicology
Research Facility to serve, particularly,
the Federal agencies forming the Inter-
agency Regulatory Liaison Group. Also
within this initiative are cooperative
programs which include NCI, OTS, and ORD.
These programs involve research to develop
enough basic data relating to chemicals,
animal species, and biological mechanisms
to permit estimates of human effects.
Establish mechanisms to assure, wherever
feasible, peer scientific review of the
plans for and results from individual
research projects, bringing to bear on
the program design the best scientific
advice available.
-------
- 299 -
o Establish an environmental criteria and
assessment function to provide quality
control for the Agency's risk assessments
and develop a program for quality assur-
ance of biological research and testing.
FY 1980 Health Research
The health research program will focus on develop-
ing new and improved techniques for rapid, reliable and
economical screening of toxic substances to provide
scientific data for regulating new and existing chemicals
in the marketplace. Efforts will also be directed toward
improving the reliability of studies on the carcinogenic
effects of ultraviolet rays. These plans include the
following priorities:
o Perform epidemiological studies of the reaction
of human populations to environmental toxic
chemicals, for example, epidemiology in the
area of human reproduction and sterilant effects,
o Develop methods for analytically determining
the exposure history of specific populations
to chemicals in general.
o Develop screening techniques for determining
means of detecting the effects of toxic
substances on the nervous system and evaluate
the significance to humans.
o Develop rapid, reliable and low-cost screening
techniques using bioindicators for assessment
of the commercial chemicals reaching the
environment.
-------
- 300 -
4
o Develop testing procedures and techniques to
measure effects of toxic substances on the
immune system.
o Examine the feasibility of using the toxicology
of aquatic and mammalian organisms as short-
term testing indicators of human health effects.
o Apply the time-to-tumor model to reduce time
required for obtaining carcinogenicity test
results.
o Test personal dosimeters, develop models to
forecast UV-B skin cancer incidence and compare
the economic value of reduced risk of skin
cancer to future generations.
FY 1981 Health Research
The FY 1981 research plan will include the continua-
tion of the research identified for FY 1980 and will
expand the parameters to support development of testing
standards for existing chemicals as required under
TSCA section 4.
FY 1980 Changes
Research will proceed as described in the FY 1980
budget with the following exceptions:
o The immune system research will be broadened
in scope to include other aspects of host defense
systems such as whole organs (lung and liver)
and whole organisms.
o Screening with short-term testing using bio-
logical indicators will include end points
relating to mutagenic, carcinogenic, and
reproductive hazards.
o Analytical chemical procedures may incorporate
development of quality assurance procedures to
be used in determining human exposure levels.
FY 1981 Changes
No changes are anticipated at this time.
-------
- 301 -
FY 1980 Environmental Processes and Effects Research
Transport and Fate -- The research work under the
plan will focus on the development of exposure
assessment models for toxic chemicals in multimedia
environments, development of improved protocols to
be used in testing of toxic chemicals, and techni-
cal assistance to OTS on complex problems. The
following are priorities:
o Develop exposure assessment models to
predict the concentration of toxic chemi-
cals in air, water and soil/sediment
environments. Incorporate single media
models for the development of a multimedia
exposure model.
o Investigate complex environmental trans-
formation processes such as photolysis
(in air, soil, sediments) and microbial
degradation for the development of proto-
cols for toxic chemical testing.
o Investigate complex transport processes
such as leaching and partition coefficient
for the development of testing protocols
to be used in exposure assessment models.
o Develop model ecosystems and smog chambers
for the validation of exposure assessment
models and for screening of toxic chemicals.
o Characterize and select soils and sediments
to be used in testing of toxic chemicals
and to determine the feasibility of a soil/
sediment bank.
o Validate and develop a representative
chemical or benchmark concept to predict
the behavior of toxic chemicals in the
environment.
Ecological Effects Research -- The major emphasis
of research in this area is to develop screening
procedures and protocols for testing of toxic chemical
effects on living organisms in freshwater, marine
and terrestrial environments. Under this plan, a
major effort on the Public Health Initiative will be
-------
- 302 -
initiated to develop a better understanding of the
effects of exposure and develop methods to predict
human exposure to environmental toxicants. Specific
priorities include the following:
o Develop, refine, validate, and calibrate
ecological screening procedures for defin-
ing the effects of toxic substances on
organisms and ecosystems.
o Conduct round-robin testing of methods
such as acute bioassay and bioconcentra-
tion tests, for assessing toxic chemicals.
o Develop predictive techniques and methods
to determine levels of human exposure to
environmental toxic chemicals. This will
involve validation of existing exposure
models and initiation of "benchmark" and
structure activity concepts for predicting
toxic chemical behavior. The development
of exposure models will require a better
understanding of transport and transforma-
tion processes, biochemical transformation
into the food chain, validation of exposure
models into laboratory model ecosystems and
microcosms. These models will be used in
the screening of toxic chemicals.
o Delineate evaluative methods to determine
human exposure to toxic chemicals at
environmental levels to validate exposure
models. The work will involve monitoring
and field surveys.
o Develop the data base on human exposure. The
work will include the evaluation and analy-
sis of the exposure data currently availa-
ble at the Federal and State level.
o Initiate experiments on photosynthesis
reactions of field crops to UV-B.
Characterization and Measurement Methods Development
— The main thrust of the research plan under this
program is to develop improved methods for the
characterization and quantification of toxic chemicals
in air, water, soils and sediments. Such methods
-------
- 303 -
are needed in determining exposure to toxic
chemicals, monitoring toxics and carrying out
transport, fate and effects studies on toxic sub-
stances in the environment. Furthermore, TSCA
requires regulation of large numbers of chemicals.
For many chemicals, especially new chemicals, adequate
methods for characterization do not exist. The
specific priorities are as follows:
o Develop improved methods for the charac-
terization of toxic chemicals in air using
such methods as resins, high pressure liquid
chromatography and mass-spectrometry.
o Develop improved collection devices for
toxic chemicals to be used in determining
exposure concentrations of toxics in air.
o Develop methods for separation and charac-
terization of toxic chemicals in soil/
sediments. Although soil/sediments repre-
sent a major sink for toxics, the current
state of the art for measuring and identi-
fying toxics in soil/sediments are extremely
limited.
FY 1981 Environmental Processes and Effects
Transport and Fate -- The research plan for FY 1981
will involve the continuation of the work identified
for FY 1980 with the following modifications:
o Acceleration of work on methods develop-
ment for exposure assessment of toxic
chemicals in multimedia environments.
o Initiation of work on transport and trans-
formation of chemicals in marine and terres-
trial environments.
Ecological Effects — The research plan for FY 1981
will involve the continuation of the work identified
for FY 1980 with the following modifications:
o Termination of the work on development of
acute bioassay testing methods for use in
evaluating toxic chemicals.
-------
- 304 -
o Initiation of chronic effects testing for
toxic chemicals on organisms and the aquatic
ecosystem.
Characterization and Measurement Methods Development
— The research plan for FY 1981 will involve
continuation of the work identified for FY 1980
with the following modifications:
opr
thl
o Expansion and acceleration of work on the
development of methods for characterization
and quantification of toxic chemicals in
soil/sediment environments.
FY 1980 Measurement and Monitoring Research —
The measurement and monitoring research will focus
on the areas of biological laboratory quality eissur-
ance and technical support related to data collection
capabilities. The priorities include:
o Develop reference and quality control
materials, and prepare technical guidelines
pertaining to methodology and biological
laboratory testing.
o Develop a laboratory intercomparison
studies program and evaluate laboratories
and laboratory procedures.
o Develop a training program comprising
quality assurance procedures and method-
ologies .
o Determine the nature and extent of toxic emis-
sions to the atmosphere through fenceline
monitoring studies around chemical complexes.
o Provide aerial sampling, photography and
interpretation to identify and assess the
nature, extent and source of toxics in
the environment resulting from the manufacture,
processing and disposal of toxic substances.
FY 1981 Measurement and Monitoring — In FY 1981
this program will focus on quality assurance for
biological testing which will be sufficiently
developed to stock and operate a repository of
biological testing and reference materials. This
-------
- 305 -
will allow interlabor^tory testing of biological
testing protocols to be conducted on a routine basis.
It will facilitate conducting evaluations on a routine
basis. It will also permit an assessment of the
proficiency of analyses and the performance of techni-
cians conducting biological tests. Technical assist-
ance support will be maintained in essentially the same
areas as were identified in FY 1980.
FY 1980 Changes — The FY 1980 plan for quality assur-
ance of biological laboratory testing is a new start. A
small program has been in existence which demonstrated
the feasibility of in vivo incorporation of inorganic
toxics into plant tissues which could be used as
biological testing reference materials. This initial
program indicates the probability of the success of the
development of organic toxic materials into tissue
samples is good. No changes are anticipated in the
technical support program to provide data collection
capabilities in the area of toxics monitoring.
FY 1981 Changes — No changes are anticipated.
FY 1980 Control Technology Research — In FY 1980
emphasis will be placed on expansion of the regulatory
data base, specifically the development and expansion
of the predictive model for chemical manufacturing.
The plan includes the following priorities:
o Use process expertise in the manufac-
ture of existing chemicals to provide and
predict information on the occurrence of
toxics as contaminants in intermediates,
by-products, products and wastes.
o Develop marketing and use information to
provide a basis for identifying substitute
chemicals and alternative process routes
including recovery reuse and recycling of
toxic wastes.
o Develop a predictive model for new chemical
manufacture to identify anticipated processes
and expected releases of toxics.
FY 1981 Control Technology Research — This program
which originated in FY 1978 and is approaching critical
mass in FY 1980, will be expanded in FY 1981. The
-------
- 306 -
major emphasis will be to support manufactur-
ing regulations development as well as control of
existing chemicals, emergency response techniques
and assistance to the regions. The predictive model
for new chemical manufacture to identify anticipated
processes and expected releases of toxics will also
be expanded.
Alternatives — An alternative to the planned
method of operation (a balance between in-house and
extramural) is an all extramural effort. This was
rejected because:
o EPA has now established expertise in terms
of both facilities and highly specialized
interdisciplinary personnel.
o Additional cost of extramural work.
-------
- 307 -
REGIONAL GUIDANCE
Abatement and Control
Overview
This guidance describes recommended Regional Toxics
Program activities and anticipated outputs for the re-
mainder of FY 1979 and for FY 1980. All of these
activities support the development and implementation of
either TSCA programs in particular or of integrated
Regional toxics programs in general. The guidance does
not discuss the development of a Regional organization
or strategy for the control of toxics, since that issue
has already been addressed by most Regions through the
development of coordinating mechanisms such as policy
committees or staff working groups. Those Regions
which have not yet established such mechanisms, however,
should do so, as the integration of Regional toxics
programs and activities continues to be an extremely
important effort in FY 1979/80, as it has been before.
Regional Priorities
The Regional activities included here are essential
both to the implementation of TSCA programs and to the
more general task of providing a systematic and integra-
ted Regional approach to toxic substances control.
The recommended activities are: (1) TSCA Program Imple-
mentation (including the School Asbestos Control Pro-
gram) ; (2) Development and Implementation of Integrated
Regional Toxic Substances Programs; (3) Industry Assist-
ance; (4) Public Participation and Information;
(5) State Financial and Program Assistance; and,
(6) TSCA Regulations Development.
Regions may find it necessary to vary the priority
of these activities to reflect any unique or unusual
problems or characteristics of their areas. If, for
example, a TSCA regulation will affect only a segment
of the chemical industry not represented in a given Re-
gion, that Region may choose not to become deeply in-
volved with its development or implementation. On the
other hand, if the Region were the principal locale for
the regulated segment of the chemical industry, more
active involvement would seem useful to both OTS and to
-------
- 308 -
the Region. Similarly, if the Region has neither a
State cooperative agreement under Section 28 nor a
Headquarters-funded public participation program, there
will be minimal need to devote Regional resources to
those areas. And finally, readers should note that
the higher priority activities will not necessarily
demand the most Regional resources, nor will the lower
priority ones necessarily demand the least.
The following sections describe the resource re-
quirements, program components, and associated outputs
for each activity. The activities discussed are not in-
tended to represent all feasible approaches, and crea-
tive alternative approaches are encouraged.
Principal Regional Activities
(1) TSCA Program Implementation — TSCA implementation
activities for FY 1979/80 should emphasize the School
Asbestos Control Program; the PCS marking and disposal
regulations; and, the Section 5 Premanufacture Notifica-
tion Program.
(a) During the second half of FY 1979 and early FY
1980, the highest priority aspect of TSCA program imple-
mentation for Regional Offices is the development of
State Voluntary School Asbestos Control Programs. This
is because the School Asbestos Control Program addresses
an immediate problem which appears solvable by an inten-
sive effort over a relatively short period.
Therefore, each Regional Toxics Program should
actively encourage State and local participation in this
program. Headquarters has developed an asbestos guid-
ance document which provides basic information concern-
ing identification and mitigation of the problem. The
Regional Toxics Program should disseminate information
on the program widely, especially to other Federal,
State or local governmental bodies, both by distributing
the document and by participating in whatever public
forums may be available.
This effort will probably require considerable
attention from Regional staff, especially in responding
to inquiries from affected State and local organizations
(e.g., school boards); but it also is probable that most
of this attention will be concentrated in the six months
-------
- 309 -
immediately after initiation of the program on March 16,
1979, a period roughly corresponding to the second half
of FY 1979.
(b) TSCA program implementation should also empha-
size the PCB marking and disposal regulations. Regional
staff should develop familiarity with the facility appro-
val process, and participate in the decisionmaking. It
is especially important that Regional Toxics Staff iden-
tify and forward to Headquarters any problems or issues
related to the permitting process, including those re-
lated to facility siting and public opposition.
(c) The Premanufacturing Notification Process under
Section 5 will demand time and attention from Regional
Toxics Programs, but neither the dimensions nor timing
of this demand can be predicted with precision yet.
Regional staff may be involved in at least two distinct
roles: (1) assisting the affected industries in under-
standing and complying with Section 5; and, (2) assist-
ing Headquarters in conducting site-specific or plant-
specific assessments.
The first of these roles is included in the Regional
Toxics Programs' activities under Program Implementa-
tion. The impact of the second role remains unclear,
since the number and distribution of Section 5 notices
cannot be predicted. The type of assistance involved
will include responding to Headquarters requests for in-
formation on the site or plant at which a new chemical
is to be produced, including whatever information may be
available from other parts of the Regional Office or
from the appropriate State.
This second role may require a significant share of
Regional toxics resources but that will not be clear for
some time. The distribution of resources and the prior-
ities in this Guidance will be revised if necessary at
such time as the impact of this activity on the Regions
is clearer.
(2) Development and Implementation of an EPA and
Interagency Integrated Toxics Substances Program — The
development and implementation of a coordinated Regional
toxic substances control program which integrates all
-------
- 310 -
relevant Federal control activities continues to be a
major activity for the Regional Offices during FY 1979/80,
Most Regions have already implemented coordinating
mechanisms in the form of policy committees or staff
working groups or are planning to do so shortly. The
Regional Toxics Program should actively participate in
such groups, and through that participation assist the
group in: defining specific toxic substances problems;
coordinating effective and efficient use of resources
in solving those problems; identifying data needs;
acquiring and analyzing data; and, establishing working
relationships with EPA Headquarters and with other
governmental entities. The Regional toxics staff role
should be coordinative, however, as the resources to
carry out the group's recommendations will be from air,
water, solid waste, etc.
The Regional Toxics Programs could also assist their
Regional coordinating groups by identifying chemical manu-
facturers and processors. Most of this information is
contained in data submitted under the Inventory Reporting
Regulation (Section 8(b)). Regional Toxic Staffs will
need to receive clearance and to develop safeguards for
the handling of such information, as access to, and use
of, some of it is restricted due to confidentiality
claims.* Further, OTS will provide summaries of Section
8(e) reports to the Regions periodically, and this in-
formation also may prove useful in helping the Region
identify potential problems. Similarly, compliance
monitoring data and records of enforcement actions can
help identify problem sites, both potential and actual.
Other useful activities include: helping the group
to identify key contacts in their Regions, both in EPA
and in other Federal Agencies; compiling a list of avail-
able toxics information; and developing information on
current or planned contracts in relevant subject areas.
Interagency program coordination (through coordina-
ting groups, for example) can have the effect of provid-
ing additional resources and information to the Regional
Office, although over the near terra this coordination
may involve only the IRLG. The IRLG is responsible for
*C1D has already provided Regions with detailed require-
ments and procedures for this.
-------
- 311 -
coordinating the activities of its five member agencies:
OSHA, CPSC, FDA, FSQS (USDA), and EPA. (Each Regional
Office has designated an IRLG contact.) Examples of
Regional IRLG activities include: personnel exchanges,
joint inspections, referral of consumer complaints, shar-
ing of investigative equipment and facilities, exchange
of chemical hazard information, and public information
and education. The Regional Toxics Program should examine
IRLG activities to determine how they can best con-
tribute to the Regional coordination effort.
OTS has not accorded spill response a high priority
and, therefore, the Regional Toxics Program should
attempt to minimize active involvement in on-site
response. Since TSCA does not provide for funding to
support the mitigation or clean-up of spills or other
environmental incidents, these actions should be left to
the various media offices or to the Regional Spill
Coordinator. The Regional Toxics Staff can help most
effectively by providing technical information concerning
the health and environmental risks of spilled (or in
situ) toxic chemicals, and in order to do this, the~
Regional Toxics Program may need access to information
sources available at Headquarters. OTS has not yet
developed criteria or procedures for ordering and choosing
among Regional requests for this kind of Headquarters
assistance, although the Program Integration Division plans
to develop such a mechanism during the last quarter of
FY 1979.
(3) Industry Assistance — The Regional Toxics Program
should serve as a local liaison between EPA and industry
by providing technical assistance, disseminating infor-
mation, and referring any requests they cannot fulfill
to the appropriate media programs or Agencies.
The Regional Toxics Program can further TSCA pro-
gram implementation by providing industry with informa-
tion on TSCA regulations and related activities. Two
ways this information can be provided are through parti-
cipation in compliance training programs developed and
conducted by Headquarters and by answering questions
from individuals concerning the various TSCA regulations,
Premanufacture Notification forms and processor reports.
-------
- 312 -
The Headquarters Industry Assistance Office also
provides this important service to industry and has
established a toll-free telephone number as part of its
program. Most calls to the Regional Office will seek
forms or publications or raise general questions about
toxic substances. As many callers as possible should,
therefore, be directed to the toll-free number so as not
to consume limited resources in the Regions.
(4) Public Participation -- Public participation has
become an increasingly important part of EPA's decision-
making, in large part because EPA's experience has shown
that an informed public can and does improve the quality
of that decisionmaking. The success of toxic substances
control will depend, at least in part, upon the public's
perception that proposed controls are reasonable, well-
designed, and cost-effective. Allowing the public to
participate in, and have an impact on, the toxic sub-
stances decisionmaking process can only foster a better
understanding of the issues and provide support for EPA
actions.
OTS has a commitment to involve grass-roots organi-
zations in its public participation program. During FY
1979, a pilot public participation program has been
developed in Region II to increase public participation
under TSCA, as well as to build public awareness of
toxics problems which may be controlled under other
Federal, as well as State and local authorities. Head-
quarters plans to select two or three other Regions in
FY 1979 to develop public participation programs through
two-year grants from Headquarters. Development of public
participation programs in the remaining six Regions is
planned for FY 1980/81. Two of the criteria for selection
of grantees are: (1) a commitment by the Regional
Office to finance the project during its third year; and,
(2) a willingness to work towards institutionalizing the
concept of public participation in the Region. Further
criteria for selection of grantees, and guidance on
grant monitoring, will be developed by the Program
Integration Division during the third quarter of FY 1979.
Regional Toxics Programs are encouraged to support
the development of public participation components in
State applications for funding under Section 28 of TSCA
as a further means for involving citizens in toxics plan-
ning, control, and decisionmaking. Those regions not in-
volved in Headquarters-funded programs are nevertheless
-------
- 313 -
encouraged to develop coordinated, innovative Regional
public participation plans and programs of their own.
Detailed guidance for this activity will be developed by
the Program Integration Division during the fourth
quarter of FY 1979.
(5) State Financial and Program Assistance — During FY
1979/80 the Regional Toxics Programs should focus their
State Financial and Program Assistance activities on:
(a) managing such State cooperative agreements as are
awarded in their Regions; (b) providing information and
assistance on the Federal program, especially with re-
spect to available information and information manage-
ment systems; (c) identifying the key people and agencies
for toxics control in their States; and, (d) developing
data on State programs, including State legislation,
regulations, and information resources.
(a) TSCA Section 28 authorizes State grants to con-
trol toxic substances. Two rounds of competition will
be held during FY 1979. The Regional Toxics Program
should provide information to States on the availability of
these grants, including making them aware of the May 27,
1979, closing date for the second round. If TSCA appears
to be the appropriate source of funds, the Regional Toxics
Program should assist interested States in developing
their proposals, consistent with the National objectives
for the program as expressed in the August 28, 1978,
Federal Register. The appropriate Regional Toxics Pro-
grams will also participate in the selection process by
reviewing and rating any proposals from their respective
regions.
Affected Regions will, of course, need to monitor
the progress of grantees within their Region after award.
The grantee State will be required to provide quarterly
and annual reports to the EPA Project Officer. The
Project Officer, in turn, in conjunction with State
Officials, should prepare and forward to the Program
Integration Division semi-annual evaluations of the grant
which include a copy of the State's annual report and
an evaluation of the grant's impact on the public, and
on State and local governments. The evaluation should
address: (1) the transferability to other State Programs
of techniques or procedures developed by the project,
and any attempts already made to transfer them; (2) the
extent to which the project has complemented or otherwise
-------
- 314 -
impacted upon Regional Office toxics programs; and (3)
possible ramifications of the project for future Head-
quarters policy, procedures, rulemaking, etc. The
Project Officer should use these evaluations to work
with State officials to guide the projects toward fitting
Regional needs. Evaluation reports should, of course,
include any modifications agreed to by EPA and the State.
(b) Regional Toxics Programs should provide in-
formation and assistance on the Federal program. The
purpose of this is to ensure that States develop pro-
grams which complement that of EPA and which are reason-
ably consistent from one State to another.
For example, several States have already developed,
or are currently in the process of developing, toxics
information systems. These systems may well duplicate,
or be incompatible with, the information systems being
developed by EPA, other Federal agencies, and even those
of other States. States should be made aware of Federal
information systems, so as to minimize the chance of
their investing time, money, and effort in their own
systems unnecessarily. The Program Integration Division is
procuring contractor support to train State and Regional
staff on the availability and use of all relevant infor-
mation systems. This training should be available by
early FY 1980.
(c) The identification of key people and Agencies
is especially important in FY 1979/80, as both the Federal
and State toxics programs are in early stages of develop-
ment. The Regions' need to convey information and ren-
der program assistance to the States requires that they
quickly learn who the "players" are in each State and
establish contact with them.
(d) The National Wildlife Federation is currently
conducting a survey of State Toxics Substances Programs
under a grant from the Program Integration Division.
Their survey will produce considerable information on
State legislation and regulations for toxics management
and control. Regional toxics programs should supplement
that base by developing information on State organiza-
tional and staffing patterns, and on State resources
such as information systems, laboratory capabilities,
etc. All of this data should be distilled into a "State
Profile" which serves two major purposes: (1) it will
help the Regional staff to identify both the capabilities
-------
- 315 -
and the limitations of their State programs; and, (2) it
will help Headquarters assess and assist the development
of State toxics programs over the next 3-5 years.
Regional Toxics Programs should send copies of these pro-
files to the Program Integration Division as they are
completed. In addition, Regional toxics staffs should
be aware of, if not participants in, non-Federal toxics
planning in their Regions to ensure consistency with the
Federal program and policies.
(6) TSCA Regulations Development — During FY 1979/80,
OTS regulatory activities will focus on: Section 4
Testing Rules; Section 5 Premanufacture Notification and
Review; Section 6 Rules (PCBs and possibly asbestos);
TSCA Section 8 Rules; and, one or two existing chemicals
or generic rule areas yet to be identified.
The Regional Toxics Programs are responsible for
reviewing draft and proposed TSCA rules to provide a
Regional perspective to the rulemaking process. The
Regional input will take the form of either active
participation in the work group process (including
attendance at work group meetings) or review of the draft
and proposed regulations.
Each work group will include at least one Regional
Toxics Program representative (the "lead Region"). The
lead Region will be responsible for keeping the other
Regional Toxics Programs informed of the relevant issues
concerning the developing regulations and for soliciting
their comments on all drafts. The lead Region will then
provide the Headquarters working group with the resulting
comments, and will raise issues identified by the other
Regional Toxics Programs for attention from the work group.
Regional Toxics Programs should ensure that all
relevant information is brought before the work group,
especially where a regulation is designed to address a
problem of special interest to one or more Region(s).
Further, each Region should solicit input and comments
from the other Regional Media offices, State offices,
and public organizations. Public input and comments
from individuals and organizations should be solicited
through existing public participation mechanisms (includ-
ing Headquarters-funded activities). Formal or informal
meetings comprise one such mechanism. The lead Region
-------
- 316 -
4
should ensure that all inputs obtained are compiled and
forwarded to the working group for inclusion in the rule-
making record.
Region-Specific Guidance
Specific guidance for those Regions having Head-
quarters-funded public participation and/or State
cooperative agreement programs is provided in the
discussion of Principal Regional Activities for public
participation and State financial and program assistance..
Resource Requirements
Regional needs for each Regional Toxics Program
(Table I) will vary depending upon such factors as the
number of States in the Region, the extent to which all
program elements are undertaken and the program's level
of involvement in each. A Regional Toxics Program of
the kind and level described here will require approxi-
mately 3.5 to 5 person years. Regions in which Head-
quarters-funded public participation projects are con-
ducted will need to devote about one additional person
year to their projects and each of these programs would
therefore require approximately 4.5 to 6 person years of
effort. This level of required resources exceeds what
will actually be available in FY 1979 or FY 1980. OTS
will augment Regional Staff by contracting for the services
of ten civil engineers, and assigning one to each Region
to assist with the School Asbestos Control Program.
Because these are contract resources, they are riot shown
in Table I, and are in addition to the 46.5 person years
listed there.
Reports
OTS expects to implement a Regional reporting system
in the third quarter of FY 1979. This system will allow
the Regions to inform Headquarters, and each other, of
significant problems and issues affecting their imple-
mentation of the program described in this Guidance. The
reports will also enable Headquarters to make such
adjustments to the program as may be called for in light
of the Regions' experiences in implementing it.
-------
- 317 -
The report should be submitted monthly to the
Program Integration Division (TS-793) and should cover
at least the following:
(1)(a) School Asbestos Control Program;
State contact (if changed); problems or complaints
from States; significant developments, including major
news coverage; activities in State legislatures; and,
any additional comments the Regional Staff thinks useful.
(1)(b) Other TSCA Program Implementation;
Any significant problems or issues.
(2) Toxics Integration;
Information on Regional coordinating groups should
include descriptions of their format (if changed from
what was initially reported); objectives; planned activi-
ties and schedule; and, planned outputs.
A summary of IRLG and other interagency activity
should also be included.
(3) Industry Assistance;
A log of industry assistance activities such as
phone calls, literature provided, industry consultations,
meetings or seminars attended, etc., should be kept to
document Regional involvement and to establish Regional
resource requirements. A summary of these activities
should be included in the monthly report submitted to
the Program Integration Division, which will then inform
the Industry Assistance Office. The summary should in-
clude: numbers of telephone inquiries received, meetings
attended, and major questions or issues raised.
(4) Public Participation/Information;
Any significant problems or issues.
(5) State Financial and Program Assistance;
Any significant problems or issues. (Regions moni-
toring cooperative agreements should report semi-annually
-------
- 318 -
as described in Part 111(5) of this Guidance. Signifi-
cant problems or issues between these reports should be
identified in the monthly report.)
(6) TSCA Regulations Development;
Any significant problems or issues.
-------
- 319 -
Table 1
Regional Toxics Program
Distribution of Available Resources by Activity
Aggregate
Activity Resource Requirements
1. TSCA Program Implementation
a. School Asbestos Control Program 7.5
b. Other (PCB, CFC, etc.) 13.0
2. Development and Implementation 10.0
of Integrated Toxics Programs
3. Industry Assistance 6.0
4. Public Participation 4.0
5. State Financial Assistance 2.0
6. TSCA Regulations Development 3.0
7. State Program Assistance 1.0
Total 46.5
Note: These are aggregate figures for the ten Regions.
Those Regions with Cooperative Agreements and/or
Public Participation grants will account for more,
and remaining Regions for less, of the resources
estimated for Activities 4 and 5 above.
The total for Activity 6 is presumably divided among
all the Regions equally since no Region will be "lead
Region" for all the sets of regulations developed during
FY 1979/80.
-------
- 320 -
01
0
G
id
4J
01
-H
M
n ^~
i4! n
•*•*•
^
M
-P
n
3
C
M
C
O
>< -rl O
EH 4J -H
M -P O
M G EH
EH 0)
CJ ErH
< 0) Ifl
rH C
>< a o TO
m E-H E
M tn id
in 4) M
EH TJ « en
D CO
CU Id TJ rl -"••
EH 01 P< (N
D 41 41 —
O c id m
(N 01 rl 0)
r3 E en o
« < a ot c
a Z o J-> id
« O rH C -P
< H ai M m
EH O > XI
§4) HH 3
Q O CO
Q
Z
CO
S o
rij -H
$ -p
fid
A]
W E
41
|^
M
O
h
a.
o
CO
EH
^^
^
>i -P
4J -H
•H rl
> o
-H -H
4J rl
O Pi
c
o
•H
01 1 -P
0 G 0)
CO »— 4
\j r^
« o a
•P g O
01 a — c
TO 0) G W O
< TJ O g -H C
1 rl 4J O
rH C G O « -H
id -H o >n c -P
O -H -H M
•H « 4J Z E E
c • « S 0) fc
£ en-p a. n o
O • rH CO HH
0) 01 3 "H -H G
EH — TO O Q -H
.
C
IB c -H 4J
rl -H 4J rH
ai c P id id
rH TJ rl C E 0
M id 0 4-1 TO O TO C 4) UHrH
c g n -H n o o en
10 -H 0) «H ax: UH o d i RJ o
&.O-P O -P O M.C.X 4J rl •
c M -H a o TO ra -H u
>WGO COS C \ X -H -H>rH
OOO O-H O 01 41 U TO C rH
•H -H X C -H )H TO 41 -H
4J 4-> >i -POO 4J 0 a .H «j a
cido idEn-H i0 14 o 10 tp in
41OC O 4J O3-H-H rHC
g-HOI -HrHl0(n-H4J4J4J«» Id-HiH
a«4H tn MHidcaiMHOgcg oco
O -H Id -H C -H -H -H Id E Id 01 -H >H m
rH 4-1 V4 4-lOTJO4-*fHM4J rH G 0
01CC9 C-HMCC3OTOX1 X.O.M
> 4) -M 01CnOOI,
m X! m en0 co
-H O U 0 rl
a en PI K PI
§
14
tr
a O
1 1 ti
C ft,
0
g M
0 O
rH
X^ ^^
nine a
0 >H 0>0 M
•H 0 C-H P,
-H -H 4-1 Id G O
>rH 0 4J 0 4J
>»fHX. 0 rH C
M 4J TO g 3-H 4J
4-> O rH \ OH P M
0> « rH TJ G V4 O
3 id 0 o 0 a
GO -H M OS
•H c 4) id x: P 3
id G g -P 3 -P >i
<»H 4J o ao id JH
o 01 x; 41 41 M d
•H p4 M TJ rH 0 g
tn a -' 3 I -H 4-) E
STO 4-1 C Id -H 3
Id 1 Id -H S rH CO
o n
TO 4-1
n M
01 o
8 a
0
a G
\ 0 m
HH Jt 3
3 aj 4J
G 4J id
§41
ra n
C
rH O
«J -H C TO
O 4J O0
-HO -H -H
§10 4J 4J 4J a
i 01 c id -H tn
jC— -4J 0 0 a>c
O Q M -H E -rl -H -H
w o o ao 4J 4J
44 a c o -ri o 0
O g 0 0 rH 4-» Id 0
0 rH IH > W Q
rH xi m 0 0 a5 u
•H o 3 ETJ S-H
M-l U 4J 0 O WrH
o aa> D A x)
Pl CO O S rH O Pl
G C
•r4 O
C E 41 0 • 4->
O rH 0 -rl 4J O «
•HrH O rH > «1 . g
•PO O XI 0 C « H
id ri x: o M-H o
a4J O M TJ 0 MH
•rl C W P. 4J rl 4J C
O O -H O «-H
-HO G rH e O-H
P o O u o Mm
n • M 0 ao
00 a 4J am o
a4J 4J C -H .H C
m u orH a a o
rH 0 0 0 * >ia-H
«i xi m a o«rH «d 4->
oagoaoa a
o < «« o o.c c c
rH U 4J • 0-H -H
\rH tna O-H x: E
0 O O 3 0 -OTJ 4J 0
+» O H 4JXI C-H •
idx: a. « a 0 « » •
4J O 4J << O -H
CO CO CO Pi Q
rH •
id 4J
C 3
o a
-H P
tP 3
«j°
^.
in
^**
E >i
0 O
--I C
XI 0
O Cn
S <
a
M
« x:
•H 4J
•P O
G - ^^.
0 O
4l J
O Pt
a M 4->
TJ c;
MH 0 MH 41
O-H O Ei
44 Hi
rl 41 hl-ll
« c n o
ITJ 1 c'
3 -H 3-H
CO CO
•
>c
O 0 O
4J -H-H
O TJ 0-H
•P 0 in a
• 4-1 o a
• id m 0. C 0
a ft 41 ao-H
50-H O-H 41
M E 4J-H
r. 0 « >
C a 0-H E-H
O 0 arH M 4J
3 XI O O
• TO rH 3 41
M >.TJ O >f«
• tn M M fc-H
3 o id m a. « •
*» »4 g u a g a>
«P. i P, « g<
4* 3 .Cl
OS Ol CO
• • •
oS
H
H 0
« H<
•< 3
O «i
O r«
Q 3
1°
-------
- 321 -
Regulations
irelopment
(6)
< 0)
U Q
en
6-.
.nancial and
it Assistance
i
•n 15 «— •
b id in
M
fl) ej>
4-> O
id S
•P IX
en
•O
G
id
G
o
•l-l
4-1
s,
-H
O G
•H O
4-» -H
l-i 4J
io id
O4 g — •
H T
o o — *
•H M-l
r-l C
ft H
o<
>, E
s s
> o
•H H
4-1 OS
U O4
< ~-
* £ J 1
4-> a ° H i
£ 0 -P *{ gg1
ai -H c 5 a o
•* » S 5 ^
0 a n o» i •* *o $
CO 3 H 006 OI-O C >
aeoo * >.H n 0 U M C
a J3 O r-l C -H 0) -rl «
\ a C -P (0 T3£ -P » -P rt
•d « id 4) -i-i o n M en -HOC
•HO) BOOI-PM 0)X!4) i-l-HOI
> M ATlUhCT £ -P 0! ^ -P B
0) 3 id -P 3
C6 en 04 O Oi
.
CO
c
o
>1 -H
>-l 4-> 0)
o id >
4J 0 -H CO
(0 -H -P B
r-l iH Id a o) a>
4) (0 -P «
en A id -P
cu o 4-1 en
M-I 4-> x en
o id fl) 0
4-> M-l U) 4J
C en c O -P
0 O C 0>
•rl IH -H 4-> 0) O
4J CO 0 -P .C g G
id oi id w 4) id
r-l iH S B -H 41 4J
•H -H D C ca i-i n
CUU-I -r\ 0 h tlH'H
B O > M-l fl) Id CD
O H 41 C > CO
U Q,K l-l O <
'
G
O
•H
-P
id
4-1
C C
id 0)
HE "O
CU 4) 4)
•H T3
c a c
O g 3
•H H Pl4
4-> 1
(8 73 tj1
a c x
•H (0
0 J3 —
•H 4J 4J >i
4J C -rt i-l
H « » G
10 g O
a. ex a
o c to
O H O -P
•rl 0) -H C
•H > o> *
JO 0) 4) rl
3 TJ 0! O
O4 *•»
•
g
id
V4
ca o
4-1 h
C 04
*u
4) O
iH
u
S _
unmary of Issues from
workgroup to other
Regional Offices from
lead Region
wunents on draft/
proposed regulations
lead Region
immary of Regional
comments (lead Region]
'fJ \J V*
en u en
^
G
O
•H
CO 4J
n 4J id
0) C B
rH (fl M G
•rl h O O
M-l O M-l -H
O C -P
M Q) -rl Id
O4 4-1 B
id fl) H
>l4J 4J O
M en id M-I
0 4J G
4J M-I en -H
id o
r-l M-l O 0
en G co
0) -rl CO B 4)
o! i-i -ri o) ey
O 0) 4-1 C
fl) +J >i CO !J3
id c id « o
^ S 5 ft
en S < W
en
£ S
s »-)
Z CM
O E^
H
H D
O O
S
^_^
ummary of Regional
comments (lead Region
ummary of media/State/
Public comments
received and issues
identified.
CO CA
• *
• rl
T) 0)
>i -P 01 X
rl C > 4-1
SO) -rl O
CO C 4) -P
« 0) 4J -r( O IQ G
r-l +J C -P 4) G W
3 10 4) rl rl 10 g
O> -P B fl) fl)
fl> en v a c i-i DI
(A 4) 0 id id
C M MM -rl rl G
4) o en o -P o) id
•P 10 10 TJ B
id co c B 4)
•P -P 0) O rl fc G
en V4 > -H o o
0 -H 4J M-l G -rt
M-I to a-p io c o -P •
ooioiiou-H toco
r-4 Oi U -H CT> g g
>1-rl 01 M-l 0) G l-l 01
l-l M-4. 0) CU-H 4J -rl Q 4-1
1
gcuiOO4)eniO-Hca
3 4J T3 rl
ca en M E-I
.
r-i
c IB
iO G
r-l 0 ea -o
0< -rl 4-> CD
o> G -a
CO) (0 C
OK rl 3
•H CnCn
4-1 M-l |
io o c tr
a o SB
•H G
0 O -P43 — •
•rl -H rl 4J >1
4-> 4J O -rl rH
ri id w a* c
« u B o> o
O4 -H fl) V4 CO
M-l iH G CO
O -H J3 CO O 4J
•rl 4J O 3 -rl G
r-l G fc 4J On id
J3 0) Oi id 0) h
3 -O 4J K U
O. M W ~--
• • •
cni
OS
H Wi
H ti
« S
< 04
D EH
0 D
Q O
S
K
-------
- 322 -
Enforcement
Regional Priorities
The following Regional enforcement activities
will be given highest priority in FY 1980:
o First Priority
- Initiate investigations and prosecute
enforcement actions in response to
toxic substances emergencies
Conduct compliance monitoring programs
and initiate enforcement actions in
support of premanufacture notification
regulations under section 5
Conduct compliance monitoring programs
and initiate enforcement actions in
support of chemical control regulations
under section 6 (including PCBs, CFCs,
and any others in effect) and rules or
orders issued under sections 5(e) or
5(f) .
o Second Priority
- Implement multi-media compliance
monitoring and enforcement program
- Coordinate regulatory and information
gathering strategies with Regional OSHA,
FDA, and CPSC offices
Implement public outreach programs and
other methods to induce voluntary compliance
with TSCA
- Conduct compliance monitoring programs
and initiate enforcement actions in
support of testing rules and reporting
regulations promulgated under section 4
and section 8(a)
Conduct compliance monitoring programs
and initiate enforcement actions in
support of import regulations under
section 13
-------
- 323 -
o Third Priority
Conduct compliance monitoring programs
and initiate enforcement actions in
support of reporting requirements under
sections 8{c) and 8(d)
Participate in TSCA rulemaking and enforce-
ment strategy development activities
Principal Regional Activities
In FY 1980, the highest priority Regional activity
will be responding to emergency situations involving
substantial threats to public health and safety and
initiating enforcement actions where appropriate.
Additional priority activities will include inspections
of facilities subject to rules or orders issued under
sections 5(e), 5(f), or to chemical control regulations
(specifically PCBs, CFCs, and any other regulations in
effect in FY 1980), and those firms which are subject
to section 5 premanufacture notification requirements.
Inspections of facilities subject to section 4 testing
rules and section 8 reporting requirements will be
conducted in close coordination with the screening process
conducted at Headquarters. The Regions will monitor
compliance with section 13 importing regulations in
cooperation with local personnel of the U. S. Customs
Bureau. Regional enforcement offices will perform the
case preparation and case prosecution functions needed
to successfully prosecute actions arising from the
aforementioned investigatory programs. The Regions
will also implement intra-agency multi-media enforcement
programs, and public outreach programs and other means
to encourage voluntary compliance with TSCA requirements.
In addition, Regional personnel will participate in
the development of enforcement strategy and policy.
-------
- 324 -
PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS (PPAs)
- Number of enforcement actions initiated in response
to toxic substances emergencies
- Number of inspections of facilities subject to
Section 6 rules on PCBs
- Number of inspections of facilities subject to
Section 6 rules on CFCs
- Number of inspections of facilities subject to
Sections 5(e) and 5(f) rules
- Number of inspections of facilities subject to
Section 4 rules
- Number of inspections of facilities subject to
Section 5(a) rules
- Number of inspections of facilities subject to
Section 8 rules
- Number of inspections of facilities subject to
Section 13 rules
- Number of enforcement actions initiated against
violators of Section 6 rules on PCBs
- Number of enforcement actions initiated against
violators of Section 6 rules on CFCs
- Number of enforcement actions initiated against
violators of Sections 5(e) and 5(f) rules
- Number of enforcement actions initiated against
violators of Section 4 rules
- Number of enforcement actions initiated against
violators of Section 5(a) rules
- Number of enforcement actions initiated against
violators of Section 8 rules
- Number of enforcement actions initiated against
violators of Section 13 rules
-------
- 325 -
Number of intra-agency multi-media inspections
conducted
Number of IRLG referrals
Number of inspections conducted under IRLG guidelines
Number of program activities conducted to encourage
support for voluntary compliance with TSCA require-
ments
-------
1980/1981 PESTICIDES MEDIA GUIDANCE
-------
PESTICIDES
KEPIA OVERVIEW
Planning Assumptions
The Federal Pesticide Act of 1978, which amended
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodent icicle Act
(FIFRA), will make the regulation of pesticides nore
efficient, more effective, and more timely. All
registration (section 3) guidelines will be completed
and in force by the second quarter of FY 30 and new
regulations, where appropriate, will he in effect at
this time and fully enforceable. The following
assumptions reflect the new directions and resumed
activities that those amendments have made possible.
Studies required by the FIFRA as amended on methods
of pesticide applications and minor use pesticides will
be completed the third quarter of FY 79, but at this
time, we do not anticipate the results to cause any
major realigning of OPP's regulatory activities. Ef-
forts to refine and improve the Agency's tolerance-
setting mechanisms will continue through FY 80 and
FY 81; no radical departures affecting Agency or
registrant resources are anticipated. Legal chal-
lenges to the trade secrets and data compensation
provisions in the 1978 FIFRA amendments are anticipated.
OPP and the Office of General Counsel expect these to
be resolved in FPA's favor.
The Generic Standard development process will be
fully productive by the beginning of FY 80. RPAR will
be merged into the neneric standards in FY 81 when the
original RPAR commitment to 65 chemicals has been
completed.
Until pesticide generic standards are developed,
I1PA will be granting conditional registrations. Con-
ditional registrations will allow the Agency to process
applications for registration of new products which
are like one already registered. Ultimately, OPP will
review all products comprehensively when they are
reregistered under generic pesticide registration
standards.
-------
- 330 -
"Me-too" products and new uses of "old" chemicals
will he eligible for conditional registration if EPA
determines that enough information is available to
evaluate unique hazards that nay be posed by the new
uses. The Agency will also issue conditional registra-
tion of new chemicals in the public interest if risk
during the period required to complete and subnit
additional studies is not unreasonable.
States will have broader authority and responsi-
bility for registering Section 24(c) "Special Local
Needs" pesticides without requiring EPA'S approval.
Regions will assist States in establishing their 24(c)
programs and will provide early guidance and screening
to States on individual 24(c) applications. Final
review/disapproval will remain a headquarter's function.
EPA will use broad discretion granted by the 1978
amendments to waive the submission of efficacy data.
OPP will evaluate this during 1980 and, if it does not
prove to be effective, will reconsider this approach.
In any case, the Agency will continue to consider
efficacy when performance of the product bears upon
public health.
In FY 1980 EPA will complete (except for updating)
the process of classifying uses by regulation, apart
fron the registration process. This will help to
realize the objectives of the applicator certification
prograii with regards to restricted use products.
The effort to develop grants-in-aid with States
and Territories for enforcement will be continued. By
the end of FY 1980, 43 States will have cooperative
grants-in-aid, and by FY 1981 the number of grants will
increase to 50.
The Office of Enforcement will initiate a new pro-
gram (Investigations of Nationally Targeted Pesticides
Public Health Incidents) during FY 1979 to focus upon
all aspects of the manufacture, distribution, use, and
disposal of certain restricted use pesticides. This
effort will be given continued empahsis in FY 1980.
-------
- 331 -
By the end of FY 19110, it i.s expected that all, or
alriost all, Federal facilities which are najor sources
will l>e in conpliance and nost ninor source Federal
facilities d£ well. Reqions should see to it that all
Federal facilities uo intend cone into conpliance as
soon as possible, and no later than the end of FY 1980.
Research and Developnent will be integrated into
supnortino pesticide activities in 1980. Furthermore,
OKD will receive its planning priorities fron the
Pesticide Research Connittee and specific requirements
fror. OPP.
The Federal Certification proyran in Colorado and
Nebraska will continue at least through FY 1981.
GPP will he staffed up to budgeted levels with
qualified professional and support personnel. Both
Regional HPAR and Special Registration Decision Units
are eliminated convene ing in l^HH.
Priorities
FY &G priorities will enphasize the completion of
the rendining RP*\P reviews, conpletion of registration
standards initiated in FY 7(' and reregistration of
existing pesticides based on these registration stand-
ards, registration of new environmentally protective
pesticide products for which conplete hazard data are
submitted, expanded enforcerent involveraent on the
;)art of the States, and increased rt?sponse to eiaerqericy
situations which involve substantial threats to public
health and safety.
FY 1081 priorities for the pesticide pronran will
be similar to those for FY 1980. PPAR will be substan-
tially completed and integrate'' into the registration
standards j'rocess. highest priority will bp registra-
tion of new environmentally protective pesticide
products. Continued completion of registration standards
and reregistration of existing pesticides based on then
will also be emphasized. Cooperative enforcement grants-
in-aid are expected to he developed in all or i.iost States
by the end of FY 1981.
-------
- 332 -
In those States which have Federal certificetior
programs, enforcement activities v/ill be in support of
efforts directed toward developing approved plans.
Federal personnel will continue to be responsible for
enforcenent of applicator certification in Colorado and
Nebraska.
Major Objectives
In FY 80 the Agency plans to review benefits and
risks of 12-17 RPAP compounds identified as posing
potentially unreasonable adverse effects and reach 15-20
final risk/benefit determinations on PPAR compounds;
irplenent the conditional registration progran; give
registration priority to new chemicals for which con-
plete hazard data are subnitted; reregister 1,c-OP-l f 400
products fron available generic standards; complete the
generic standards initiated last year and initiate the
preparation of 40-50 generic standards, including the
reassessnent of associated tolerances.
!"ajor objectives, reflective of the special
registration progran, will be for Peg ions and Head-
quarters to provide tir.ely ancl responsive guidance to
the States relative to their Section 5(f) experimental
use pemits and review 180-24G Section 5 registrations
in a median turnaround time of 120 days; review 1,000-
1,500 Section 24(c) special local needs registrations
and conduct overview activities on their final actions;
review 170-220 Section 18 emergency exemptions in a
median turnaround tine of 4 weeks including full scien-
tific review of pertinent data.
Guidelines for biological pesticides will be promul-
gated. The Agency will establish 80-120 pesticide
residue tolerances and review 75-100 amendments for food
and aninal feed crops after review of data and risk/
benefit analyses in a median turnaround tine of 105 days.
The laboratory audit program will he continued;
50-70 laboratories will be audited.
FOI requests will be given an initial response
wiH'in 10 days followed by a final response as quicKly
as possible. Monitoring for hazard prediction and
significance of potential problems v;ill continue, but
will be more closely tuned to support the regulatory
process.
-------
- 333 -
The abatenent and control objectives for 1981 re-
nain the sane as for 1980 except that the RPAR process
wi.ll be integrated into the generic standards process
and increased eiv.pahsis will be given to reqistration
of innovative, environmentally protective compounds.
The Federal Fnforcer.ent role v.'ill continue to be
one of oversight, guidance, an support of non-Federal
enforcement effects in States and Territories. The
procjran will also focus upon all aspects of the nanu-
facture, distribution, use, and disposal of certain
restricted use pesticides.
During the next two years, four riajor objectives
will be driving the F;nvironr.ental Protection Agency's
research and development program. These are (1) con-
tinuing the integration of the Office of Research and
r.evelopment into the nainstrean of the pesticide
activities by supporting the Pesticide Research
Cor.T^ittee thet was jointly developed by OKD, OPt>,
Office of Enforcement and regional representation,
(2) enhancing the Office's capability to improve the
scientific ami technological data for use in future
regulatory and enforcement actions, (3) inproving
that data through scientific peer review of research
procedures and results, quality control of risk assess-
ments, and cruality assurance of monitoring data, and
(4) providing specific data in response to OPP's
innediate needs.
-------
- 334 -
HEADQUARTERS PLANS
Abatement and Control
Plans and Emphases
In 1980, the Registration Standards program
will cement the standards production rate and
maintenance process as a workable regulatory
m.eans of reregistering, in roughly a decade,
approximately 40,000 pesticides. Based on the
initial experience with the prototype standard,
OPP expects development of each standard to take
13 to 14 months. Thus, the first standards
initiated in FY 79 will be conpleted in FY 80
and an estimated 48 standards will be initiated
annually thereafter.
The subtasks involved in the development of
a generic standard include screening all published
literature, company submitted data and other un-
published information; bibliography preparation;
data evaluation and assessment of fate effects
and exposure risks and benefits; preparing a
regulatory rationale and position; seeking public
comment and participation; preparing and publish-
ing the standard document; and managing records
with the necessary ADP and micrographic support.
During FY 1980 EPA will be maintaining the
prototype standard completed during FY l'J79 as
well as initiating maintenance on new standards
as they are completed. The subtasks involved in
maintaining completed generic standards include
screening all newly published literature, new
company, laboratory, monitoring, and accident
data and updating the standard, as necessary,
from this material. In particular, this effort
covers updating standards to include new uses,
new tolerances, new special registrations and
new data. Reregistration of existing pesticides
will be initiated upon completion of appropriate
generic standards.
In 1981 there will be a continuation of the
1980 program in which standards will be completed
from the previous year and new standards will be
initiated.
-------
- 335 -
In 1'^BO the rebuttable presumption against
registration process will be completed on the
majority of the 65 chenicals originally listed
as RPAR candidates. Final decision documents
including environmental impact statements will
be prepared for 15-20 chemical classes on which
a rebuttable presumption has already been declared
because these chenicals are suspected of having
an adverse effect on nan or the environment. In
addition, decisions on whether to issue an RPAR
will wade after data gathering for, and evaluation
of, 12-17 other chemical classes. Two administra-
tive hearings are anticipated, for which technical
and scientific support v;ill be provided. The Sub-
stitute Chemicals Program will be integrated into
the RPAP process since final decision documents
require the determination of feasible alternative
pest control strategies thot can be safely and
effectively substituted for RPAR chenicals.
In the laboratory audit program 70 labora-
tories which perform tests in support of pesticide
registration and other studies will be audited
jointly by the Pood and Drug Administration and
CPA. Primary emphasis will be placed on audits
of toxicology labs of particular importance to
the generic standard and RPAR process. EPA head-
quarters personnel and regional PTSED inspectors
will perform Good Laboratory Practice (CLP) and
data audit inspections at environmental chemistry
and fish and wildlife testing facilities. Two
hundred registrant validations of toxicology
studios will be evaluated.
Similarities between the RPAR and registra-
tion processes illustrate the cost effectiveness
of combining future RPAR investigations with the
standards production. Hence, the RPAR program
will be reoriented in 1980 for merger with
Registration Standards in 1081.
Because of the legislative changes permitting
conditional registrations and the freeing of
strictures in the registration process, OPP will
be able to increase its regulatory decision-making
in 1980 on applications for administrative and
-------
- 336 -
technical ar.endnents, new chenical registrations,
routine registrations, and tolerance petitions.
Increased resources will not only perf.it the
processing of an increased work load, but will
allow for reduction in decision miking tine and
application backloo. No change is expected in
1981.
Section 18 emergency exemptions will be pro-
cessed within four weeks of receipt and Experi-
nental Use Permit applications and petitions for
temporary tolerances will receive scientific and
administrative processing within 120 days of
receipt (this represents a 5U% reduction in
processing tine over FY 7H). One hundred addi-
tional periodic RUP reports t/ill l/e reviewed
plus an additional 50 revised labels which, are
required as a condition for granting CUF's.
State-issued 24(c) registrations and 5(f) experi-
nental use pernits will be reviewed Cor less
obvious descrepancies and necessary corrective
action will be taken. Appropriate connents and
constructive criticise will he forwarded to the
States. In addition revised labels will bp
reviewed for eureerent v.>it>; the terns of each
special registration and a sanplinc, progran will
be established to evaluate the scientific validity
and legal adequacy of tleta subnissions. Ijo
change is expected.
ri'he cert if ication and training orant progran
was terminated in 1^79; however, up to $2 million
will be provided in 1980 for cooperative agreement
support to (1) States and Indian tribes which agree
to initiate and/or upgrade their certification
and training activities; (2) Statos and tribes in
which FPA's ongoing progran evaluation justifies
continuation of federal assistance; (3) permit
continuation of Federal certification and training
activities in Colorado and Nebraska. headquarters
will continue to appraise integrated pest manage-
ment techniques using the contract tnechani?n.
RPAK and IP^I functions will be performed at head-
quarters. P.egistrant/public inquiries and
problens with these prograns will be directed to
the regions. "egions will increase their public
-------
- 337 -
av;erenesfj outreach to agricultural and other
significant interest groups in order to build
public understanding and acceptance of Pesticide
pronrarrs. Classification by rooulation of
pesticide:-: for restricted use will be corplot^d.
Changes
In view of the passage of the Federal Pesti-
cide Act of 1978 which air ended the FIFT£, no
legislative changes are anticipated for FY 198U
or FY 1CM1. Organizationally, sinilar functions
of On"'S and Opp will continue to be integrated in
loni. Also, the P.PAR process will be ineruen into
the generic standards production process.
Alternatives
The primary alternative to be considered in
each proqran is that of contracting. All proqrar
olenents of non-regulatory nature should be
examined. Thon detenuning the possibility of
contracts, the following will be considered:
(1) cost effectiveness; (2) nuft.lity control; (3)
response4 to EPA operating programs; (4) definition
of work scope; (5) time requirements; (6) sensi-
tive/nonsensitive nature. Prourans will also be
examined to determine if existing contract? could
incorporate additional progran reouiranents bv
expanding an existing contract rather than
gene-rating new contracts.
Enforcement
Plans and
'J'hf i'nforcei^ont Proa ran in FY l^fio v;ill be a
continuation and expansion of the treno tov/ard
increased state involvement. It is expected that
cooperative enforcenent yrants-in-aid will be
developed in all or nost States and Territories
l-y the end of FY 19SO. The Federal role at the
Regional level ir. Ftates and Territories which
have grant s-in-aid will be that of State program
oversight and guidance, developing and monitoring
of State programs and activities, providing
training to State progran staff, assisting as
necessary in case developr ent, and initiating
-------
- 338 -
Federal Enforcerient actions on the basis of State
activities where appropriate. Consequently, in
States and Territories with grants-in-aid,
traditional Federal functions such as establish-
ment, TnarKet^lace, and use inspections will cease
or decrease significantly. In States without
cjrants or with grants of less than comprehensive
scope, Federal inspectional activities will con-
tinue.
The proaran area entitled "Investigations of
Nationally-Targeted Pesticide Public Health
Incidents" will continue in FY 1980, having begun
operation late in FY 7°. It's role is primarily
to set priorities for enforcenent investigations,
emphasizing hunan health concerns. The programs
initiation does not entail an increase in
resources, rather a reprogcanning. It does, how-
ever, require increased coordination between OC
and OPP.
Hnforcenent will continue to focus upon the
enforcenent of standards and requirements relating
to the certification of applicators. Appropriate
enforcenent efforts in this area v;ill be under-
taken by most States in support of their certifi-
cation programs. However, in those Regions in
which a State has not established an approved
certification plan, EPA will be responsible for
both applicator certification and enforcement of
such certification. In such Regions, the Federal
pesticide enforcement progran nust include an
active enforcement effort in support of Federal
applicator certification.
mhe laboratory audit progran will continue to
be given special emphases by the Office of
Enforcenent. During FY 1930, the Office of Pesti-
cide Programs will expand the laboratory audit
program to include environmental data, using the
same criteria and techniques applied in the
toxicoloqical audits. The Office of Enforcement
will provide inspection support for those audits.
-------
- 339 -
Changes
In response to the greatly expanded State
role in the pesticides enforcement program, the
Office of Enforcemnt will be reorganized along a
functionally-based organizational structure rather
than the existing nedia-oriented structure. The
present three pesticides branches, Scientific
Support, Policy and Guidance, and Program Opera-
tions, and the one toxic substances/solid waste
branch will be replaced by three branches, each
havinq functional progran responsibilities. Each
branch will have two sections with more narrowly
defined functions. Personnel will administer
three statutes, the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide
and Rodenticide Act, the Toxic Substances Control
Act, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act. The reorganization will advantageously
respond to the siniliarities in all three statutes
by consolidatinq functions, responsibilities,
activities, and corresponding resources within
the same organizational elements.
Alternatives
While the trend of the Pesticides Enforcement
Program is presently toward the continuation and
expansion of involvement on the part of the
States, it is possible that the responsibility
for enforcement could be wholly restored to the
Federal EPA. The Office of Enforcement would
focus upon uniform* pesticide compliance among the
States and Territories. Federal responsibility
for the enforcement of the pesticides prog rain
would, of course, necessitate a large increase
in position resources.
The enforcement program continues to develop
grants-in-aid with States and Territories. In
response to this growing trend, the Office of
Enforcement could administer a program which
reviews and audits the adequacy of state enforce-
ment programs. Such a program would entail an
annual review of the efficiency and effectiveness
of State enforcement activities.
-------
- 340 -
Presently, the participants of the Inter-
agency Regulatory Liaison Group (IRLG)—Of.UA, FDA,
CPSC, and EPA—are coordinated to participate in
actual cooperative compliance and enforcenent
activities. As a result, the four agencies are
involved in cooperative inspections which are
conducted at any site or for any purpose at the
referral, recormendation, or request of a cooper-
ating Federal agency. The cooperation anony the
agencies could he extended beyond referral
inspections to include joint inspections whenever
and wherever appropriate.
The laboratory audit program which is cur-
rently conducted in EPA and FDA could be conducted
instead by a private contractor in order to free
Office of Enforcenent resources. The Office of
Enforcenent would then focus entirely upon case
development, and determining whether allegations
of nisconduct warrant referral of the case to the
Department of Justice.
Alternatively, the four agencies which par-
ticipate in the Interagency Regulatory Liaison
Group (IJRLG) — EPA, FDA, CPSC, and OSHA — could
conduct the laboratory audit program. The
rationale for this course would be to ensure the
nonitoring of the laboratory practices and testing
data within the purview of the four agencies.
ADP systems are currently operated at the
Regional level. Instead, these systems could be
located at Headquarters to be conducted either by
Headquarters personnel, or by a private contractor,
Centralization of the systert would ensure a uni-
form system of data gathering and analysis.
Research and Development
Plans and Emphasis
The Office of Research and Developnent will
intensify efforts to develop protocols for obtain-
ing a scientifically sound, legally defensible
pesticide data base, to provide specific data
requested by OPP, and to assist in assessing the
data in relation to pos.tioide regulatory actions
-------
- 341 -
required by the Agency. Special emphasis will be
placed on a continuing integration of the Office
of Research and Development into the nainstrean
of the Agency's pesticide activities by supporting
the Pesticide Research Comnittee that was jointly
developed by ORD, OPP, Office of Enforcement and
Regional Representation. ORD's planning and
reporting system will be synchronized with the
plans of the Research Committee and the Agency's
ZBB process. Certain laboratory reporting
relationships will be realigned; this realignment
will enhance human health research and integrate
the environmental transport, fate, and effects
research pertaining to pesticides.
The increased integration of ORD efforts into
the regulatory mainstream will result in an in-
crease of data and methods to support OPP's
regulatory needs. In looking at health effects,
ORD will conduct exposure estimates on priority
compounds identified by the RPAP and generic
standards process. Similarity, ORD will conduct
research into ecological effects in response to
near-tern regulatory needs. This will include
data assessments, toxicoloyical tests and trans-
port and fate tests for RPAR compounds. In
addition, ORD will develop the quality level of
analytical measurement data, expressed in terras
of precision and accuracy, to support OPP regula-
tory decisions.
Additional activities include efforts to
build into our scientific and technological
activities appropriate review mechanisms, includ-
ing enhanced peer review for individual research
projects and systemic programmatic review for
pesticide research activities. ORD will require,
to a greater extent than in the past, quality
assurance practices for all environmental quality
monitoring and analytical activities.
Research activities will follow as closely
as possible the strategy and needs developed by
the Pesticide Research Committee and be responsive
to specific OPP needs. The Committe contemplated
research required by OPP, OE, and the Regions to
-------
- 342 -
fill knowledge and data-gaps, to develop scienti-
fic techniques for obtaining these data, and to
respond to future needs that are nore appropri-
ately anticipatory in nature. Research needs
were discussed under three najor topics; popula-
tions at risk, exposure assessnent, and adverse
effects. Also included were research needs for
quality assurance, integrated pe?t nanaqenent and
technical support. The Committee agreed that
exposure assessment should receive special
attention in FY SO and HI.
The Integrated Pest Managenent (IPM) progran
will develop systems for use with chenical pesti-
cides to provide a necessary alternative for the
pesticide registration process. Prinary eir.phases
v/ill he directed to najor crop ecosysters (corn,
cotton, soybeans, alfalfa, and apples) and urban
pests. Technology transfer activities will
continue in order to educate the use community.
The registered uses of a pesticide determine
the population group at risk. As increased anount
of exposure data for different pesticides becone
available, it will be possible to nake accurate
and neaningful identifications of overall popula-
tions risk. VJithin these {-opulations, attempts
will be made to pick out subgroups of persons at
relatively high risk of developing illness fron
pesticide exposure. Extrapolation froio teratology
and reproduction studies in experimental aninals
will help to define those compounds that nay pose
a risk to oregnant wor.en as well as to the fetus
and the newborn child. Other research will study
susceptibility to pesticides of aninal given sub-
optional diets.
Interest in the population at risk also
includes pesticide exposed populations that nay
have incurred vulnerability to other hazards.
Hew studies to survey this orobler will include
evaluation of the inr»unoloqic competency of
aninals exposed to various pesticides and
capability of pesticide exposed aninals to with-
stand bacterial and viral challenge. FY 7^ and
-------
- 343 -
earlier research activities in pesticide exposure
studies have produced guidelines for general use
by registrants in measuring exposure of workers
to pesticides. Emphasis in 1080 and 19B1 v;ill
be on developing and validating procedures useful
in measuring erivironnental exposure to pesticides,
particularly exposure of nearby residents to drift
fron agricultural application. Also, research
will be begun to evaluate generic models for com-
pounds and application methodology in estimating
hunan occupational and environmental exposure to
replace study of individual situations.
In-house and extramural studies will produce
the requisite scientific understanding, laboratory
measurement techniques, and mathematical descrip-
tions of the interactions of pesticide chemicals
v;ith air, water, and soil and the actions of
organisms on the chemicals. This information will
then be developed into test protocols that incor-
porate necessary quality control provisions and
decision-r.aking tools to evaluate the environ-
mental transport, transformation and distribution
of pesticides. Specifically, research on
environmental exposure will include determination
of transport processes in water, sediment of soil
and biota in terrestrial and aquatic environments.
There will be a close coordination between
exposure research and effects to define the degree
of hazard or extent of safety of current pesti-
cide exposures for both occupationally and
environmentally exposed populations. For many
pesticides, by-products, metabolites and biotrans-
formation products, exposure methodology is now
sensitive to levels below those known to have
toxic effects on man and the environment. Effects
research will be carried out to continue to assure
the safety of ambient levels of pesticides or to
detect any hazardous levels that exist. Biologi-
cal-type pesticides are a special problem and will
be given special attention.
In addition to the usual research on effects
of specific pesticides on aquatic and terrestrial
organisms, OKD will develop the capability to
-------
- 344 -
conduct subacute av ian toxicity tests on a limited
scale. These tests will yield information unat-
tainable from other Federal agencies.
Quality assurance, including both internal
quality control and external quality assurance,
will be nade an integral part of every protocol.
Current procedures in analytical and biochemical
projects provide for such procedures, but quality
assurance can and will be improved. Additional
efforts will be made to ensure that in-house and
extramural pesticide laboratories are routinely
involved in quality assurance programs for
chemical analysis.
In a closely related area, ORD will work
closely with OPP and OF to develop protocols
for "good laboratory practices" and will become
involved in transferring this information to
Regional Inspectors and others as necessary.
Changes
Other than items addressed in the "Plans and
emphases" section, there are no najor changes
anticipated in P & D activities.
Alternatives
Research activities are now conducted through
a mixture of in-house and extramural activity.
Alternatives to this approach include accomplish-
ing research activity through grant and contracts
only or through in-house activity only.
Grant and contract v/ork permits exclusive
control over planning and implementation of
desired research but often requires even longer
lead-times than now required. This approach does
not furnish the agency with required data analysis
and necessary expert testimony at regulatory
hearings.
The office of Research and Development is
not able to maintain under present resource allo-
cations, the necessary skills mix or expertise to
-------
- 345 -
address the entire scope of scientific questions
that arise v/ithin the Acjency. Also, it is scien-
tifically advisable to maintain close contact
with academic and private sectors.
Therefore, a research operation which is
either exclusively in-house or conducted throuqh
grants and contracts is not feasible.
-------
- 346 -
RFC-1 PEAL CUITW7CF
Abatement and Control
The Agency has recently decided to allocate 55
positions to the Regional Offices for abatement and
control activities. However, in order to provide
perspective to Regional priorities and activities at
the 55 position level, the guidance addresses four
levels of resources: (1) 10 positions, relating to
special circumstances; (2) 25 positions, reflecting
the FY 'BO President's Budget; (3) 55 positions, re-
flecting the actual resource availability; and (4) 67
positions, representing the optinun level of activity.
Regional Priorities — In general, Regional prior-
ities are based on those functions necessary to
the implementation of FIFPA which can nost cost-
effectively be performed at the Penional level.
The specific activity prioritization which
follows in the Principal Regional Activities
part of this guidance is further premised on two
factors: (1) some activities are "denand" acti-
vities which the Renions must perform reqardless
of resource level, assuming a resource base
greater than zero; and (2) various "non-demand"
activities vhich the Regions must undertake,
given additional resources, before they expand
their efforts the "denand" activity areas beyond
a passive "response" mode to "moderate" or
"active outreach" levels. The distinctions among
these terms will become clear through the regional
Activities section which follows.
Regional Activities -- mhe activities discussed
here are set out by cumulative resource levels
— 10 positions, 25, 55, and 67. Further, acti-
vities are discussed in priority and resource
increment order within each cumulative level,
with priorities proceeding sequentially from
each resource level to the noxt. Finally, the
discussions deal with national resource aggre-
gates and not Region-specific resource levels,
as allocation of positions will be accomplished
through the workload analysis process.
o 10 Regional post ions. These positions,
divided equally between Regions VII and
VIII, will support the Federal certifica-
tion program in Hebraska and Colorado.
-------
- 347 -
o 25 Regional position. A,t this level (the
FY '80 budget level), the Regions can
expect to provide response capability
in the following areas:
Respond to Conoressional and Fre-
edom of Information inquiries;
respond to inquiries fron the press,
public, and other institutions.
Provide support to Federal, State,
and local government aqencies,
responding particularly to requests
for assistance with specific problems
and to reviewing and connenting on
FIR's, Sec. 20R plans, disposal plans
and siniliar activities.
Assure public health and safety,
particularly in relation to assisting
in dealing with pesticide spills
and fires; supporting migrant and
other farr, worker safety programs;
assisting poison control centers,
hospitals, physicians, and worker
clinics; and evaluating health
and safety implications of Sec.
24(c) registrations and Section.
is requests.
Provide product reoistration and
compliance assistance chiefly by
responding to registrant requests
for information and guidance.
o 55 Regional positions. At this level
(the presumed FY '80 level), the Reqions
can expect to perform a wider range of
activities with a greater degree of out-
reach effort (NOTE: Some activities
are listed two or three times, with
variances in the described activity. The
reader should recall that each described
activity represents an incremental re-
source increase from the activiy prece-
eding it. The concept of increments is
retained within the 55 resource discussion
section as a contingency against a lesser
actual resource availability.) Activities
within the 55 position level are:
-------
- 348 -
Participate in intra-Agency, inter-
media coordination and planning
activities, including support to the
IRLG, Sec. 208 plans, FIS processes,
Headquarters task forces and Agency
public hearings.
Provide preliminary guidance to
States on Sec. 18 and Sec. 24(c)
activities, and screen Sec. 24(c)
reqistratons and Sec. 18 requests for
obvious improprieties. (Final review
and/or disapproval to occur at Head-
quarters. )
Complete State Certification plan
development and process plan amend-
ments .
Pespond to Indian Tribes' requests
for assistance with pesticides pro-
blems and issues.
Provide certification grants admini-
stration at a level necessary to neet
minimum grants requirements.
Provide expanded level level of sup-
port to reoistrants and others subject
to or impacted by registration require-
ments.
Fxpand public interface activities
to include: greater information
flow to the public; speeches before
associations; groups and organiza-
tions; and broader understanding
of Agency policies and decisions.
Increase State certification and
training activity to include program
monitoring for compliance with regula-
tions and plan requirements, and to
assure continuation of State programs.
-------
- 349 -
Fxpancl State Certification and train-
ing activity to cooperative anroenent
level to achieve maxima] qualitative
levels in all States.
Fxpand Fee. 24(c) and Sec. IB acti-
vities to include full ranne of
guidance and assistance to States
in the administration of the pro-
qrams. (This activity would not
include final Aqency determination
on individual Sec. 24 (c) product
reqistrations, hut would serve to
linit the burden on Feadauarters
resources to those reqistrations of
auestioriable validity requiring
in-depth scientific review.)
Peview and issue supplemental reqi-
strations.
Provide full range of guidance and
assistance to States in the deve-
lopment and implementation of Sec.
5(f) State
Fxpand Sec. IB activities to in-
clude monitoring of all exemptions
granted .
Provide full range of support ser-
vice to Headquarters in the moni-
torinq of EPA-issued Sec. 5 experi
mental use permits.
-------
- 350 -
67 Eeqional positions -- These positions
represent the number with which Regions
would be able to undertake all activities
potentially operable at the Peqional
level. The additional activities are:
Provide outreach capability for
registrations compliance assistance,
including "road shows" to reach all
registrants, distributors, and
dealers.
Monitor Sec. 5{f) State plans for
compliance.
- Provide public and special inte-
rest group outreach.
Provide final Agency review capa-
bility on all Sec. 24(c) product
registrations.
- Support the Pesticide Incident
Monitoring Systen (PIUS) through
such activities as coordination of
investigations, and reports, assis-
tance in nedical diagnosis and
evaluation, and preventive educa-
tion.
-------
- 351 -
Region-Specific Guidance — Since the above pri-
orities and activities are all-inclusive and
inter-Regionally applicable, no additional
guidance aimed at specific Regions is necessary
here.
Enforcement
Regional Priorities
The Office of Enforcement v;ill continue to
bring enforcement actions in emergency situations
where the use, supply, and disposal of pesticides
involves substantial threat to public health and
safety.
The Pesticides Enforcement Program will con-
tinue to encourage the increased involvement of the
States and Territories. The program expects to
establish cooperative enforcement grants-in-aid
in all or nost States and Territories.
In order to fulfill their role in the
Investigations of Nationally-targeted Pesticide
Pub.lic Kealth Incidents, the Regions will convey
information on select restricted use products
and their production sites to the States, and
provide oversight, guidance, and support in
implernentating and conducting the program.
State personnel and FPA personnel in States
without cooperative enforcement agreements will
initiate establishment, books, and records
inspections at all producing sites; conduct
use observations; and pay careful attention to
disposal practices. Emergency situations or
incidents of misuse involving these products will
of course, take precedence over all other
situations„
The Office of Enforcement will continue to
emphasize Regional involvement in the conduct of
the joint FDA-EPA laooratory audit program. in
cases in which the Agencj.' has reason to believe
that data deficiencies or falsifications exist,
the Regions will investigate such alienations of
data fraud and develop and provide evidence in
the event of an1' subsequent enforcement action.
-------
- 352 -
The Regions will work closely with Headquarters
to determine if a specific case should be referred
to the Department of Justice of a U.S. Attorney's
office for prosecution. In conjunction with the
laboratory audit program, Headquarters will con-
tinue to emphasize a program consistinq of four
courses designed to train regional pesticides
inspectors for participation in the audit nrogran.
The training will provide inspectors with a back-
ground in the basics of scientific theory and
practice in toxicology £«nd chemistry.
Regional Activities
Despite the increase in State enforcement
activities, certain functions will continue as
Regional responsibilities. Included anong these
are laboratory data audits, nonitoring of
Section 18 emergency exemptions of States and
Federal agencies, cooperative interagency
activities, and enforcement overview of State
certification programs. In conjunction with
OSHA, CPSC, and FL'A, the CP/1 is committed to
developing and implementinq joint cooperative
enforcement activities.
FPA will maintain an enforcement overview of
State conducted applicator certification programs
to assure that appropriate enforcement programs
are conducted by the states. Finally, Section 18
nonitoring activities will remain a Federal
function even in States cooperating in the grant
program; it is not appropriate for States to
monitor exemptions granted to themselves.
Section 5(f) of the new amendments to FIFRA
authorized the States to issue Experimental Use
Permits (EUPs). ™he Regional role will be to
conduct use observations for Experimental Use
Permits (EUPs). In the first year, it is
anticipated that 5-10 States will establish
authorized FUP issuance programs.
Should the decision be made that the £DP
systems will continue to be supported by the
Regions, it is expected that the Regions will be
called upon to continue to assume the responsi-
bilities necessarv for that function.
-------
- 353 -
The pesticides enforcement prog ran will con-
tinue to Monitor the importation of pesticide
products in order to determine that imported
products meet the same requirements imposed upon
donestic pesticide Manufacturers. In addition,
the progran will monitor the content, destination,
and intended uses of exported pesticides. Pesti-
cide nanufacturers are required to keep records
of the chenical content, quantities, purchasers,
and dates of shipment and receipt of all exports.
Regional responsibilities will include assuring
that these records are maintained, and inspecting
products ready for distribution. Furthermore,
the 1978 amendments to FIFRA require exporters
to label unregistered pesticides as such and to
obtain statenents from importing countries that
they understand the product cannot be used in
the U.S. Pegional personnel will inspect
producer records to assure that pesticides are
exported in accordance with FIFRA.
Region-Specific Guidance
Enforcement of Federal certification programs
in States without approved certification plans,
anong Indian tribes, and anony Federal agencies
has been the major responsibility of the regional
pesticides enforcement program. In States which
do not have approved certification plans, Federal
certification programs will continue. High
priority therefore, will be given to an active
and assertive Federal certification enforcement
effort in any Region having nonparticipating
States. Such an effort demonstrates the Agency's
commitment to maintain the credibility of the
certification program in general, and any Federal
certification program in particular. Therefore,
it is essential that Regional VII and VIII pursue
Federal enforcement of federal certification
programs in Nebraska and Colorado, respectively.
-------
- 354 -
PROJECTED PROCRAfl ACCOMPLISHMENTS (PPA's)
Abatement and Control
Registration Standards
Number of active ingredient standards initiated
Kunber of active ingredient standards completed
RPAR Decisions
Uunber of decisions to RPAP
Number c><: tinal RPAR decisions
Number of toxicology lab audits
Registration
Number of adninistrative/technical amendments
processed
Number of new chenical registrations processed
Number of routine/intrastate registrations
processed
Number of reregistrations [processed
Special Registrations
Number of Section 18 registrations/median
processing time in weeks
number of Section 5 registrations/median
processing time in days
1,'umber of flection 24 (c) reoistrations processed
Tolerances
Number of tolerance petitions/turnaround time in
days
Number of amendments processed
Number of inert ingredient requests
-------
- 355 -
Pesticides Use Management
lumber of State certification and traininq plans
approved
Number of federal agency plans approved
t:unber of restricted uses classified
Enforcement
Pesticides Enforcement
Number of States awarded qrants-in-aid
Number of State inspectors trained
Timber of State-conducted investigations of
nationally-targeted pesticide public health
incidents
Number of State-conducted use inspections
l;unber of State-conducted establishment
inspections
Number of State-conducted marketplace
inspections
"umber of FPA-conducted investigations of
nationally-targeted pesticide public health
incidents
Number of EPA-conducted use inspections
Number of EPA-conducted establ ishm.ent
inspections
Number of EPA-conduoted marketplace inspections
Number of pesticide dealers monitored by States
Number of pesticide dealers monitored by EPA
Number of State applicator certification programs
monitored for enforcement adequacy
Number of import entry documents reviewed by EPA
-------
- 356 -
!•.unher of State-conducted inport inspections
number of KPA-conduoted inport inspections
Nunber of laboratory data audits
number of Section 18 monitoring;:
Pesticides Knforcenent (Continued)
tiunber of interaqency cooperative inspections
(IRLC)
Nunber of civil actions
tiunber of criminal prosecutions
Nunber of stop sale, use, or renoval orders
Mumber of Feet ion 9(c) warnings
I.'unber of Section 14(a)(2) warnings
Kumber of inport detentions
Nunber of samples collected
Nunber of Section 5
Research and Development
Health Effects
Completion time for the development of improved
detection 5;ystens for pesticide compounds and
residues
Completion time for review and evaluation of
available information to determine pesticide use
hazards
Completion time for development of methods for
analyzing and determining the effects of new
pesticide control agents
Completion time to develop prediction models for
determining potential human effects from use
exposure to pesticides
-------
- 357 -
Ecological Effects
Number of P.PAR Data assessments
Number of toxicolog ical tests conducted for
RPAR
Number of transport and fate tests conducted
for RPAR
Completion tine for developnent of toxicoloqical
and transport and fate testing nethods
Completion tine for development of exposure and
hazard assessment models
Pesticide Management (Industrial)
Completion tine for IPM studies for major crop,
urban, and other selected ecosystems
Number of technoloqy transfer conferences and
seminars
Quality Assurance
Number of analytical methods performance evalua-
tions completed
Number of analytical methods performance evalua-
tions initiated
Number of new pesticide reference materials added
to repository
Hours devoted to Quality assurance assistance to
upqrade residue lab performance
Number of samples distributed from repository
Number of interlaboratory performance evaluations
of pesticide residue labs
Transport, Fate, and Exposure
Number of exposure models and analyses of RPAR
pesticides in multimedia and estuarine environ-
ments
-------
- 358 -
<
IJunber of protocols developed for testing of
pesticides in soils, v/ater, and sedinents
Completion tine for developing improved
terrestrial microcosms for pesticide testing
Nunber of reports issued on transport and
transformation of selected pesticides in water,
soil and marine environments
-------
1980/1931 RADIATION MEDIA GUIDANCE
-------
RADIATION
MEDIA OVERVIEW
The Environmental Protection Agency is responsible
for protecting the public and the environment from the
adverse effects of unnecessary radiation. Recent Con-
gressional and Executive mandates have directed EPA to
focus on the following specific radiation sources and
pathways:
o The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) and the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation
Control Act (UMTRCA) charge EPA with providing
standards for protection from waste materials
with radioactive content.
o The Interagency Review Group on Nuclear Waste
Management (IRQ) identifies EPA as the standard
setter for the various classes of waste in its
Report to the President.
o The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 require
EPA to protect public health and the environ-
ment from harmful radioactive airborn effluents.
These specific authorities dictate the major emphases
which EPA's radiation program will pursue in FY 1980-81.
Planning Assumptions
FY 1980 -- The Radiation Guidance assumes the passage
of no new legislation, but does assume endorsement
by the President of the agency roles and work
schedules proposed in the IRG Report. In addition,
Guidance assumes that:
o EPA will promulgate the standard for disposal
of high-level radioactive waste in FY 1980.
o The Agency will complete its cancer policy.
o No major changes in Federal energy policy
will be made.
-------
- 362 -
o No major natural or man-made event will
occur or be discovered to require imme-
diate EPA action to prevent or mitigate
serious acute population exposure to
radiation. If such an event does occur,
EPA will provide required support by
diverting efforts from lower priority
projects.
o The Office of Radiation Programs will
determine sources or substances requiring
control under the Clean Air Act Amendments
of 1977 by the beginning of FY 1980.
FY 1981 — The following additional assumptions
apply to FY 1981:
o EPA will promulgate standards for three
major source categories under CAA. Atten-
tion can then focus on other sources.
o EPA will issue the standard for inactive
uranium mill tailings.
o EPA, other Federal agencies, and the Con-
gress will agree on EPA's role in develop-
ing Federal Radiation Guidance.
Media Priorities
Two priorities are proposed for FY 1980: developing
standards for radioactive wastes and airborne radioactive
emissions; and establishing organizational roles and
procedures to enforce these standards. In FY 1981, the
Radiation Program will continue to emphasize standards
activities, while implementing an effective standards
enforcement program.
Media Objectives
In FY 1980, ORP will give top priority to developing
standards for inactive uranium mill tailings, with imme-
diate transfer of that effort to developing standards for
active uranium mill tailings as it becomes possible to do
so. The Interagency Review Group schedules will serve as
a guide to planning the EPA program for developing
standards for transuranics waste (TRU), land and sea dis-
posal of low-level wastes, and the decommissioning and
4
-------
- 363 -
decontamination of nuclear facilities. Work will progress
in all of those areas with resource commitments generally
in the amounts specified in the IRG Subgroup II Report
on Involvement. ORP will pursue these efforts through
both FY 1980 and 1981, on the assumption that this level
of effort will continue until the recommended IRG
schedules are completed.
To the extent possible, the Radiation Program will
support international efforts to harmonize radiation pro-
tection policies for environmentally sound nuclear
activities.
Of equal importance are continued efforts to imple-
ment the Clean Air Act. ORP will issue the first stan-
dards for CAA radioactive effluents in FY 1980, and the
Office of Enforcement will begin planning for enforcement
of these standards.
EPA will continue to perform its Federal Guidance
functions as prescribed by the Atomic Energy Act. Both
ORP and ORD will continue to study the prevalence of and
health effects caused by nonionizing radiation. The
degree to which this role is pursued is the subject of a
separate paper for the Administrator's Analytical Agenda.
Precisely how EPA exercises this authority will affect
ORP's resource requirements.
ORP will give second priority to operating the
Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System (ERAMS),
and identifying potential hazards through a limited pro-
gram of special studies and assessment of emerging
technology. Headquarters and Regional personnel will
review significant Federal actions as required under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
ORP will limit technical assistance to States to
localized problems which have wider ranging significance
and can be accommodated in the work schedules for higher
priority efforts. These priorities may change, however,
if specific situations are found to pose significant
hazards.
-------
- 364 -
HEADQUARTERS PLAN
Abatement and Control
Plans and Emphases — As indicated in the program
priorities, ORP will emphasize developing standards
as required by the Clean Air Act, and accelerating
the pace of standards development for radioactive
wastes to meet the needs of the other Federal.
agencies.
Changes — ORP will rely increasingly on the work of
contractors due to the greater availability of
contract dollars than in-house staff. Also,
enforcement of radiation standards within EPA may
require significant resources for the first time
in FY 1981. The Agency will determine the impact
of this change on the Regional Radiation Program
role and requisite staffing in the course of
developing the FY 1981 ZBB.
Alternatives — The Agency has typically used con-
tracts as a means of accelerating the development
of regulations and avoiding the need for very large
in-house staffs. This approach has worked well in
the areas of air and water pollution abatement and
control, where the Agency is the largest single
force affecting the universe of contractors. In
the radiation field, however, the Department of
Energy dominates the contracts market, and EPA is a
relatively small competitor. Contractors who
depend on DOE for their principal source of funding
are not always willing or able to undertake work
which EPA needs to write regulations. The DOE
National Laboratories (Argonne, Brookhaven, Oak
Ridge, et al) have the capability of performing
much of EPA's requirements, but Congress raised
the question of conflict of interest when these
Laboratories performed work for the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
The Agency could increase its in-house staff and
reduce reliance on contractors as an alternative
to the dual problem of competing with DOE and
avoiding the appearance of conflict of interest.
-------
- 365 -
Research and Developmenc
Plans and Emphases
° Mgnioni z ing Radiation (NIR)
- "~ Experimental animal research
on the teratologic, mutagenic, immuno-
logic. behavioral, and neurophysiologic
effec'. s of low power density, chronic
exposure to frequencies of environmental
significance. Investigations of the
mechanisms of interaction of NIR with
biological systems using microwave
spectroscopy , experimental studies of
effects of NIR and amplitude-modulated
MIR on iroembranes and isolated systems.
Initiate pilot epidemiological studies
of selected populations. Begin to
develop a competence in thermoregulatory
physiology and the dosimetry of partial
body resonance.
£Y_19_B.l — Thermal physiology research to
determine the biological correlates of
localized heating in animals; investiga-
tions of the interspecies comparisons of
thermoregulatory systems; computer
modeling of human thermoregulatory
systems. Conduct experimental and theore-
tical studies of the interaction of NIR
with biological membranes, directed
towards mechanisms of interaction.
Investig£\te amplitude-modulated NIR
phenomena in whole animal systems. If
warrant-eel , conduct full-scale retro-
spective epidemiologic studies and
initiate pilot prospective studies.
-------
- 366 -
o Ionizing Radiation
- FY 1980 — The ORD reimbursable program
provides comprehensive off-site support
to the Department of Energy programs at
the Nevada Test Site (NTS) and other
sites. This support will include mobile
and aerial radiological surveillance of
each nuclear test and radiation monitor-
ing of groundwater, animals, and other
types of samples in and around NTS.
A new emphasis for FY 1980 will be in
the development of exposure and dose
estimates for the population in the
vicinity of NTS as a result of all pre-
vious nuclear tests. The quality
assurance program provides radioactive
reference standards and samples, the
development of quality control guides,
and on-site inspection and interlaboratory
tests to determine the capability and per-
formance of measurement systems and
operations.
FY 1981 — The Agency will consider
initiating a program of research for
ionizing radiation.
Changes Anticipated
o Nonionizing Radiation (NIR)
- FY 1980 — An ORD Public Health Initiative
in FY 1980 will provide $2.0 million and
3 man-years to expand research on the
mechanisms of interaction, to develop
exposure systems for long-term experi-
mental animal studies, to begin epide-
miological studies , and increase our
knowledge of the ambient radiofrequency
environment.
- FY 1981 — None anticipated.
-------
- 367 -
o Ionizing Radiation
- FY 1980 — Over the past two years the
Off-site Program has been extensively
reviewed up through OMB. The present
program is the minimum satisfactory
product resulting from these reviews.
No further changes are anticipated in
this or the quality assurance program.
FY 1981 — The Agency anticipates no
changes at this time. An Analytic
Agenda Issue will consider a research
program for ionizing radiation. The
Agency will also review again how the
Off-site Program should be operated.
Alternatives
o Nonionizing Radiation (NIR)
Elimination of this R&D program either out-
right or through contracting out in toto
would likely cost the Agency its expertise
in nonionizing radiation health effects,
an area of growing public concern.
o Ionizing Radiation
There are three alternatives for the
operation of the Off-site Program. The
first is that ORD continue to operate
the program in its present mode. The
second alternative is for EPA to discon-
tinue support to DOE's testing program.
These two alternatives have been widely
discussed previously, and they will
necessarily be treated in the ranking
process of Radiation Decision Units.
The third alternative is for EPA to accept
full responsibility for design, operation,
and funding oJ the Off-site Program.
The Agency has not conducted a research
program for ionizing radiation since 1976.
An Analytic Agenda Issue will examine the
alternative of starting such a research
program again.
-------
- 368 -
REGIONAL GUIDANCE
Given the major role of the Radiation Program is to
reduce the public health impact of human radiation expo-
sure by reducing unnecessary exposures, Regional Programs
must participate in activities related to locating poten-
tial sources of unnecessary radiation exposure and in the
prioritization of remedial programs. These activities
place the Regional Programs in the position of being
both an extension of Headquarters Programs and the prin-
cipal radiation advisor of the Regional Administrator.
Through this mechanism , the Regional Programs are
expected to provide input to Headquarters on matters
related to future standard setting. It is essential that
the Regional Program develop competence and working
relationships with State Programs to ensure that remedial
actions are adequately implemented. Working relations
with other involved Federal agencies must also be devel-
oped for similar reasons. Headquarters liaison is also
essential so that problems can be acted upon and applic-
able guidance can be interpreted.
Often Regional Programs must respond quickly to
rapidly developing issues caused by the discoveries of
new sources or other problems. Because of this, programs
must develop the ability to reprogram resources from
lower priority work areas to handle these contingencies.
Also, utilizing State Program resources and available
ORP resources should be a means for handling these con-
tingencies. This further requires strong State Program
development and liaison.
To achieve these objectives the Regional Radiation
Program must involve itself in certain areas:
Priority One
1. The characterization of various radiation
sources within the Region is an important func-
tion of the Regional Program. Each Region
should have up-to-date status reports on the
various sources which include a quantifica-
tion of the health effects consequences of
the source. This task should be directly
related to ORP guidance and standard setting
in too priority areas (i.e., UMTRCA, Radwaste
-------
- 369 -
Criteria, High-Level Standards for Radwaste, and
CAA) . MED/AEC sites, phosphate sites, and
radium contaminated sites are specific sources
that should receive attention for providing
input to ORP priority standard setting.
Regional representation on working groups, to
consider proposed radiation standard or guid-
ance, is an Agency requirement. From a program
perspective it is also desirable, since it pro-
vides an opportunity for consideration of direct
Regional experience and concerns gained through
1 above, especially with regard to implementa-
tion. Regions should identify working groups
in which there is special Regional interest and
expertise and communicate this to ORP. Working
groups dealing with top priority standard and
guidance setting (i.e., all Radwaste work,
phosphate guidance, and PAG guidance) should
receive substantive input from Regional Programs
based on experience gained in 1 above. Input
will be channeled through lead Regional Repre-
sentatives as outlined in ORIO's procedures.
The uranium fuel cycle (UFC) is one area where
unnecessary radiation exposures may be
encountered. Environmental Impact Statements
(EIS) for Light-Water Reactors (LWR) and for
other nuclear fuel cycle facilities (e.g.,
waste disposal-related facilities) are prime
mechanisms for pinpointing UFC exposures.
Review of these statements fulfills EPA's NEPA
requirements and requires a very specific know-
ledge of local conditions, concerns, and sen-
sitivities. For these reasons, this function
was transferred to the Regions in the past.
While this is a high priority item, the work-
load is not necessarily distributed evenly
among the Regions. Alsc- radiation Federal
Facility inspections are performed under the
same context as the EIS review function.
-------
- 370 -
Priority Two
4. Radiological Emergency Response Planning (RERP)
for fixed facilities and for transportation is
an extremely important function for the Regional
Radiation Program because it is the prime means
for controlling unnecessary exposures to the
public due to possible incidents and emer-
gencies. This consists of reviewing and con-
curring in State emergency response plans,
assurring that plans are up-to-date, and test-
ing and critiquing existing plans. The Regions
must ensure an adequate ability to respond and
protect the public by ensuring that State plans
incorporate and implement PAG guidance.
5. The Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring
System (ERAMS) and other radiation monitoring
and surveillance activities are an important
Regional Radiation Program responsibility
because these are the prime means by which the
radiological quality of the environment can be
monitored and problem sources identified.
Headquarters ERAMS functions are also a priority
two item. The Regions must assure that the
ERAMS stations are maintained and operated for
the Agency by State and local governments and
are operable during emergencies whenever cind
wherever required. Some of the States operate
monitoring systems continuously, providing
data to the Agency on environmental radiation
levels and trends. Most are in standby mode,
being activated in time of emergency or when
unusual levels of ambient radiation are
expected, such as from an above-ground
nuclear detonation. The system basically pro-
vides data for the air and water media programs.
In addition to ERAMS, other Federal, State and
local monitoring and surveillance programs may
be in existence which might aid the Agency with
its radiation protection responsibilities.
The Regions should identify these, evaluate
them in accordance with Agency criteria, and
determine the feasibility and mechanisms for
incorporating them into the Agency's overall
monitoring and surveillance effort.
-------
- 371 -
Assisting other media programs with enforcement
activities is another requirement made of the
Regional Radiation Program. The extent of such
assistance is dependent upon the technological
complexities involved. Certain Regional Pro-
grams must also provide support by acting as
Regional Radiation Safety Officer. For FY 1980,
much of this function is expected to be directed
at assuring full compliance with the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act. Regional Radiation Program efforts
would be directed at State and local program
reviews, laboratory reviews, and assistance
with compliance actions.
Priority Three
7. The development and strengthening of State and
local Radiation Control Programs is a very
necessary Regional function. To a very great
extent, the Agency must rely on competent and
capable State and local programs to assist with
the National effort of protecting the public
from unnecessary radiation exposures. These
programs provide the immediate interface with
individuals and groups that might be impacted
by radiation exposure situations or by Agency
regulations. It is very necessary that sound
and harmonious working relationships be
developed between the Agency and State and
local programs. The Region should foster
such a relationship by supporting State and
local programs with technical assistance,
information exchanges, training opportunities,
and an annual Regional meeting of Radiation
Control Program Directors.
8. Providing a source of information for the general
public on radiation matters is a necessary Regional
function. Many individual concerns relate
to very specific situations that require
local knowledge to enable development of a
meaningful response. The Region should be able
to acquire and provide this type of input. In
addition, the Region should also have the
capability for relating National policies and
procedures to practical, local situations.
-------
- 372 -
PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS (PPAs)
Nuclear Power PlantsJEISs
*No. of draft statements reviewed
No. of final statements reviewed
*Percent of statements reviewed on time
*No. of statements with an Environmental
Reservation rating
*No. of Statements with an Environmentally
Unacceptable rating
Uranium Fuel Cycle EISs
*No. of draft statements reviewed
*No. of final statements reviewed
*Percent of statements reviewed on time
*No. of statements with an Environmental
Reservation rating
*No. of statements with an Environmentally
Unacceptable rating
Generic EISs
*No. of draft statements reviewed
*No. of final statements reviewed
*Percent of statements reviewed on time
*No. of statements with an Environmental
Reservation rating
*No. of statements with an Environmentally
Unacceptable rating
-------
- 373 -
Radiation Sources (other than operating reactors)
*No. of source-specific reports reviewed
*No. of reports written characterizing
source-specific sites
Radiological Emergency Response Planning
*No. of States with adequate plans
No. of State plans reviewed
No. of emergency response tests observed
No. of critiques supplied to NRC on emergency
response tests observed
Radiological Emergencies
*No.of emergencies and/or incidents in Region
*No. of emergencies and/or incidents with
Regional response
*No. of transportation accidents and/or incidents
*No. of fixed-facilities accidents and/or
incidents
Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring Systems (ERAMS)
*No. of continuous ERAMS stations in Region
*Percent of continuous ERAMS stations in
operating condition
*No. of standby ERAMS stations in Region
*Percent of standby ERAMS stations in
operating condition
-------
- 374 -
<
Radiation Standards Setting
*No. of Regional input reports to working groups
*No. of working group meetings attended
State Radiation Program Development
State Program Control Directors Regional
Meeting (one per year)
Response to Public Requests for Information or
Assistance
*Quarterly Reporting
-------
1980/1981 NOISE MEDIA GUIDANCE
-------
NOISE
MEDIA OVERVIEW
Goal
The goal of the EPA noise control program is to
eliminate as much exposure as possible to levels of
noise harmful to public health and welfare. The noise
program uses two principal means to achieve this:
regulation of noise emissions from products which the
Agency has identified as major noise sources; and
control of noise by State and local governments.
Planning Assumptions
For FY 1980 and 1981, the EPA noise control
program assumes that: (1) work will continue on
completing the noise emission regulations begun in
previous years with no new starts in FY 1980. Depending
on the successful completion of work in progress, new
efforts in surface transportation and consumer products
will begin in FY 1981, along with continuing related
technology investigations. (2) One new product emission
regulation (trash compactors) and one product labeling
regulation (hearing protectors, along with labeling
general provisions) will become effective in FY 1980.
Regulations for buses and motorcycles (including
replacement exhaust systems) will become effective in FY
1981. These regulations will result in related
enforcement activities in FY 1980 and FY 1981 (see
Appendix 1 which shows the Agency's current noise
regulatory schedule and additional products to be
studied). (3) The Agency will aggressively implement
the new authorities contained in the Quiet Communities
Act in FY 1980 and 1981 (including expanded assistance
to States and localities in enforcing noise control
laws), with a resulting increase in the number of State
and local programs in FY 1980 and FY 1981. (4) The
Agency will expand its research on noise health effects
in these two fiscal yeatrs. (5) All appropriate facets
of the noise control program will be involved in an
increasing effort to address urban noise problems,
particularly in concert with the urban-related programs
from other Federal agencies. (6) The Noise Enforcement
Division will order remedial actions by manufacturers
and seek criminal and civil penalties from manufacturers
-------
- 378 -
for non-compliance under the Noise Control Act. (7) In
FY 1980 and FY 1981 no organizational changes are
anticipated; various changes were implemented in FY 1979
as a result of the Quiet Communities Act.
Media Priorities
The four key priorities of the EPA noise control
effort for FY 1980 and 1981 are: (1) completing
regulations begun in previous years, which are now
overdue; (2) enforcing those existing regulations which
will achieve the greatest reduction in levels of
environmental noise; (3) implementing the Quiet
Communities Act so as to achieve the 1985 objective of
400 active local and 40 State noise control programs,
including enforcement assistance to States and
localities; and (4) expanding efforts in the
investigation of noise health effects, particularly
non-auditory effects.
-------
- 379 -
HEADQUARTERS PLAN
Abatement and Control
In the noise abatement and control program, the
FY 1980 and 1981 plan will involve efforts in noise
emission regulation and labeling, related investigations
into noise pollution abatement technology, efforts to
promote the development of effective State and local
noise control programs, and studies of noise health
effects.
Noise Emission Regulation and Labeling
In FY 1980 the Agency should issue Notices of
Proposed Rule Making for pavement breakers and rock
drills, and lawnmowers, and final noise emission
regulations for motorcycles and buses. A final noise
emission regulation for truck-mounted trash compactors
will be issued in FY 1979. In FY 1981 no Notices of
Proposed Rule Making will be issued, and Notices of
Rule Making will be issued for pavement breakers/rock
drills and wheel and crawler tractors.
These efforts will continue the phase of noise
emission regulations begun in 1975 which was
supplemented by the identification of lawnmowers and
pavement breakers/rock drills in 1977. FY 1981 will
mark the transition into the next phase of noise
emission regulation. This involves addressing the
remaining surface transportation sources which are not
controlled, i.e., light vehicles and tires. (It should
be noted that at the present time the Agency has not yet
committed to any specific control strategy for these
products and that the study effort now going on will
determine whether emission regulation, labeling,
State/local control or some mix of these is the most
appropriate course of action.) Another initiative in FY
1981 will be to continue and accelerate work in consumer
product noise control. It is expected that a final
labeling regulation will be promulgated for one consumer
product in FY 1981, and the Agency will continue to
review other products for potential emission control or
labeling. Finally, the Agency in FY 1980 and 1981 will
continue and accelerate its study of the noise problem
and control strategies regarding industrial machinery.
-------
- 380 -
Technology Investigations
The Agency will also continue technology
investigations, which are oriented toward future
possible rule making in the surface transportation area.
If the noise exposure relief experienced as a result of
the Interstate Motor Carrier regulation and the
introduction of quieter heavy and medium trucks in
compliance with EPA regulations is to be maintained or
further reduced, the permissible noise levels of future
(post-1985) new trucks and buses will have to be reduced
periodically. In order to determine what future levels
may be achievable, the Agency is acquiring and modifying
trucks and placing them in fleet service. These will be
tested for noise level reliability and cost of
maintenance. In another technology program, the Agency
is reviewing types of internal combustion engines and
correlating them to noise levels. This may result in
further investigation of various noise-reducing
modifications for internal combustion engines. Another
project in FY 1980 will review tire designs, and may
lead to a technology demonstration if various designs
generate significantly lower noise levels.
State and Local Assistance
EPA's State and local control efforts are carried
out both at Headquarters and in the Regional Offices.
They are oriented toward producing 400 active local
noise control programs, 40 State programs, and the
addition of 400 new noise control "components" to
existing local programs.
The goal of 400 active local programs is generally
targeted to communities over 50,000 population since
noise problems tend to be greater in more highly
populated areas. However, some smaller communities that
are a part of larger urban aggregates will also be
included in some instances since they share "urban"
characteristics. The 40 State programs should include
the 40 most populous States, although the Agency will be
willing to assist less populated States with special
problems if EPA resources permit. The criteria for an
"active" program include: noise legislation covering at
least one of the local noise control "components" listed
below; the allocation of personnel and funds;
instrumentation; and the institution of enforcement
actions. The "components" include (1) motor vehicle
-------
- 381 -
control, (2) stationary source control, (3) construction
noise control, (4) control of noise through abatement
planning and prevention, and (5) public information. At
the present time, EPA has identified 43 active local
programs and 12 active State programs. The Agency is in
the process of analyzing this survey more extensively
and also checking directly through the Regions as to
program status. Therefore, this number is expected to
change.
In FY 1980, EPA plans to directly assist
approximately 37 communities and 13 States through
"start-up" financial and technical assistance and
agreements with States whereby the State will take over
or prepare to take over the EPA-run ECHO program in the
State. In addition, approximately 30 other communities
will receive assistance through the EPA-run ECHO
program. In FY 1981 the Agency hopes to be able to
provide direct financial assistance to additional
communities and expand the ECHO program to additional
States.
EPA will also continue to carry out noise control
demonstrations. These will include comprehensive
demonstrations (the Quiet Communities program
experiments), demonstrations involving control of one
noise source, such as motor vehicles, and transportation
planning demonstrations. These demonstrations are
primarily designed to provide EPA with information on
the most effective control measures for noise pollution
This information can then be distributed nationwide.
Obviously, however, the communities where such demon-
strations are carried out will generally benefit, and an
active noise control program will result or be expanded.
In general, the thrust of local program development
efforts should be in motor vehicle control, which is
consistent with the national priority. We anticipate
that program development efforts will be toward the
following (in priority order): motor vehicle control,
stationary source control, control of noise through
abatement planning and prevention, and control of
construction noise. As new programs are started and
components are added to existing programs, the Regions
will have to keep records on the types of components
which are adopted; it is expected that the
-------
- 382 -
results will generally be consistent with the national
priorities and each Region's strategy for achieving
active State and local programs. We further expect that.
quarterly reporting of active program components and
components added to existing programs will be required
when the Regional reporting requirements for FY 1980 are
made final by EPA management.
The Agency will also attempt to add noise as a
major component to EPA air projects and other Federal
agency (non-noise) projects, particularly urban projects
on a demonstration basis. Examples might include partic-
ipation in the Department of Energy "weatherization"
program, in HUD housing rehabilitation efforts, or the
air pollution vehicle control programs.
Health Effects Research
The basic objective in undertaking noise health
effects research is to generate information and data,
especially in the area of quantified dose-responses to
noise exposures, which can be used in developing
regulatory actions, community noise control measures,
and cost-benefit analyses and evaluations. It is also
important to inform the public about these effects, so
that individuals can take action on their own to avoid
excess noise.
It is generally accepted that noise effects are
fairly well documented in areas of hearing impairment,
annoyance, and activity interference. Information and
evidence generated from studies during the past 3 to 5
years suggests that there may be non-auditory effects
at levels lower than those harmful to hearing. This
is still not clear, however, and more sophisticated
and controlled studies are needed in this area.
In determining its noise research needs, EPA has
carefully "tracked" the scientific community to assess
the state-of-the-art on health effects due to noise
exposure. It is now clear that there is a consensus of
findings and recommendations regarding research
initiatives. Assessments have been completed by the
following: Department of Health, Education and
Welfare/National Institute for Environmental Health
Sciences; National Academy of Sciences; Federal Inter-
Noise Effects Research Panel; National Academy of
Sciences/Committee on Hearing and Bioacoustics Draft
Report WG 81 (Effects of Long-term Exposure to Noise
Upon Human Health); International Commission on the
Biological Effects of Noise; and the Interagency
Regulatory Liaison Group (EPA, CPSC, FDA, OSHA)
-------
- 383 -
The consensus of conclusions and recommendations
is that non-auditory effects need to be studied in more
detail with emphasis on:
o Noise as a possible factor in
cardiovascular disease;
o Long-term, controlled studies using
subhuman primates to see if chronic
deleterious non-auditory health effects
ensue from representative occupational and
social noise exposures;
o Noise events and sleep disturbance—general
health effects;
o Reproductive effects of noise exposures in
women; and
o Interactive effects of other factors with
noise, such as chemical and physical
agents, and other stressors.
These conclusions have been provided to both
the executive and legislative branches of the Federal
Government.
The Quiet Communities Act (QCA) of 1978 reflects
the concern of Congress with respect to these research
needs. Section 2 of the QCA amends Section 14 of the
Noise Control Act to emphasize the need to "conduct
research ... to investigate psychological and
physiological effects of noise on humans . . . with
special emphasis on the non-auditory effects of noise."
Further research on the non-auditory health effects
of noise is needed because (a) there is a substantial
body of work only in the area of cardiovascular effects,
and not in the endocrinological, immunological,
reproductive and other areas, and (b) the cardiovascular
literature, while strongly suggesting an association
between high noise exposure and hypertension, is
incomplete. Work in 1330 will be directed toward
demonstrating or clarifying this association. In FY
1980, 1981, and beyond, if an association between noise
and cardiovascular disease has been clearly
demonstrated, research will be directed toward
establishing a cause and effect relationship through
appropriate prospective, intervention studies. The
ultimate requirement is for a dose-response criterion to
quantify this cardiovascular effect, and other
non-auditory health effects of noise.
-------
- 384 -
It is EPA's plan to move forward with a health
effects research program which emphasizes the possible
effects of noise on the cardiovascular system in
addition to continuing some work in progress on hearing
loss in children. In FY 1979, health effects research
plans include:
o University of Miami study—assessment of
the effects of protracted noise exposure on
cardiovascular function using rhesus
monkeys. Long-term research employing
detailed specification of the auditory
environment and sophisticated monitoring of
physiological function. (Second year of a
four-year study; co-support with NIEHS).
o Pels Institute (Long-range study)—under
subcontract to determine the effects of
environmental noise on children. This
information will assist in the development
of hearing loss criteria for children and a
better understanding of the susceptibility
of children to noise. (NINCDS will
co-support in FY 80.)
Plans for an expanded FY 1980 health effects
research program include:
p University of Miami Study (Third year)
o Epidemiological Study—Examine the
long-term effects of noise exposure on the
cardiovascular status of workers. (Two
year study—possible co-support with
NHLBI).
o Investigate teratogenic and reproductive
effects of noise exposure. (DHEW/CDC may
co-support.)
o Studies regarding perception of intrusive
noise, pure tones, impulsiveness, and
temporal factors.
o PELS Study—Environmental noise on children
(continuing).
-------
- 385 -
Projected plans for FY 1981 health effects
research, assuming resources are available, will include
the continuation of (1) a major epidemiological study,
and (2) the University of Miami animal study. In
addition, the initiation of some new studies should
cover areas such as subjective and behavioral responses,
effects on children, and the effects on sleep and
related general health.
Alternatives
During the ZBB, the Agency will want to consider
the following operational alternatives for carrying out
the noise control program. (1) Continue the present
relatively low level of direct financial support (or a
lower level) or expand this as the primary means of
developing State and local noise control. (2) As a
means of improving performance on issuing regulations
and State and local assistance, increase the level of
Federal staffing or continue the very high rate of
contracting out. (3) Change the relative priority of
new regulatory initiatives and related technology
investigations as compared with other facets of the
program.
Enforcement
Plans and Emphases — In FY 80, EPA's Noise Enforcement
Division plans to enforce those new product noise
standards which will most reduce environmental noise.
This means that standards effective in FY 80 will be
ranked on the basis of their estimated effect on
noise. The Division will enforce information labeling
requirements only to the extent that its limited
resources permit. The noise enforcement program will
also develop the enforcement strategies and attendant
regulations necessary to support the Office of Noise
Abatement and Control's regulatory development schedule,
With respect to the Quiet Communities Act of
1978, the noise enforcement program, in concert with
the overall EPA noise program, plans to expand its
assistance and guidance to State and local noise
enforcement programs. This includes developing
additional State/local noise enforcement procedures and
guidance on the role of State and local programs in
enforcing Federal information labeling requirements.
The Noise Enforcement Division will also provide
-------
- 386 -
guidance on specific State and local noise enforce-
ment problems as they arise. NED plans to develop and
distribute several general enforcement guidance packages
to assist State and local noise enforcement activities.
In FY 81, the Noise Enforcement Division will
emphasize the enforcement of those new product noise
emission standards which became effective in prior
years, while continuing any enforcement activities
initiated in FY 80. Enforcement strategies for additional
actions will be developed according to a schedule
established by the Office of Noise Abatement and
Control. The noise enforcement program plans to review
its assistance and guidance to State and local noise
enforcement programs to ensure that its activities
provide necessary information and support. If necessary,
some redirection could occur to address other or
additional enforcement needs to State and local noise
enforcement programs. The Noise Enforcement Division
will coordinate with ONAC in this area to avoid any
duplication of Federal efforts.
Changes — In FY 79, the noise enforcement program has
acquired the authority to seek civil penalties for
violation of §10(a)(l), (3), (5), or (6) of the Noise
Control Act. This provision provides for increased
effectiveness in the enforcement of new product
standards and information labeling requirements.
In FY 80, the §6 new product noise emission
standard for compactors will become effective. Also,
the information labeling requirement of hearing protectors
becomes effective.
In FY 80, under the authority of the Quiet
Communities Act of 1978, the Noise Enforcement Division,
will provide increased State and local noise enforcement.
guidance assistance through demonstration grants,
training programs and related activities.
Alternatives
0 Eliminate product verification (PV) testing;
rely only on selective enforcement audit (SEA)
tests with a simplified sampling plan.
0 Replace single PV test with a simple statistical
test program prior to distribution of products
in commerce.
-------
- 387 -
Use of a contractor to handle required submittals
under regulations for information labeling
requirements.
Eliminate PV testing; use a certification
program similar to that used by the Office
of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control.
It may be possible to assign other than
permanent full time personnel to work for
an equivalent of 1 to 10 man years on State
and local noise enforcement activities at
one or more Regional Office locations.
Potential Regional noise enforcement
responsibilities are: (1) conducting
noise enforcement training workshops;
(2) assisting in development and review of
enforcement procedures and of enforcement
provisions of new State legislation and
local enforcement programs; (4) monitoring
and analyzing enforcement data from State and
local programs; (5) collecting and analyzing
information about States and local enforcement
problems and procedures; (6) developing and
assisting in implementing State and local
enforcement activities which directly complement
Federal enforcement activity; (7) conducting
Federal tampering investigations; (8) coordinating
with the Regional Noise Program Staff in
briefing of State and local prosecutors; and,
judges in noise control and enforcement; and,
(9) reviewing and commenting on headquarters
Enforcement Division documents.
-------
- 388 -
REGIONAL GUIDANCE
The key Regional priority for FY 1980 and 1981,
as in the greater parts of FY 1979, will be to manage
regional noise resources so as to make significant
progress toward the Agency's 1985 goals of 40 active
State programs, 400 active local programs, and the
addition of noise control components to 400 active
programs. As stated in the Headquarters Plan, these
targets are oriented toward cities over 50,000
population and the 40 most populous States. The Office
of Noise Abatement and Control will be sending out
soon a list of all cities over 50,000 population and
between 25,000 and 50,000 in each Region, along with
data on individual city population and population
density. Also, ONAC will send the results of its
1977-78 survey indicating which of these cities have
active programs and legislation, and are interested in
EPA assistance. Finally ONAC, with Regional assistance,
will be developing a workload projection model for
Regional use in planning for FY 1980 and FY 1981.
The Quiet Communities Act of 1978 provides the
Agency with a number of tools and programs by which
the program's goals can be achieved. It is intended
that the Regions have as much discretion as possible in
using these tools to obtain their objectives in each
Region. In FY 1980, it is expected that all financial
assistance, except demonstration assistance and
transportation planning assistance will be directly
awarded by the Regions rather than Headquarters in FY
1980. This continues the trend seen in FY 1979, when
most of the decisions will be made in the Regions
although the actual paperwork will be signed in
Headquarters.
Each Region should develop a five-year strategy as
soon as possible for using all of its noise control
resources to meet the 1985 State and local program
development goals, with special emphasis on meeting the
goal of active State programs as early as possible so as
to facilitate the achievement of the community goals in
later years. As a first step, the Regions will have to
review survey data and assess through other means the
number and identity of local programs that meet the
Agency definition of "active" programs. Then each
Region should indicate what portion of the national
program goals will be achieved in the Region by 1985.
The Regions should use State/community population and
population density as general criteria for deciding
-------
- 389 -
where to "target" initial efforts, along with the
national program priorities (motor vehicle control,
etc.) mentioned in the Headquarters Plan. However, each
Region will also have to consider a number of other
factors including State/local interest, fiscal
condition, etc. in deciding where to focus its program
development efforts in FY 1980 and 1981. The major
tools and programs which the Regions can use in FY 1980
and FY 1981 are as follows:
Regional technical centers
These centers should be established in most
Regions in FY 1979, and be operating fully in FY
1980 and 1981. They will provide technical
assistance and training to States and localities
under the guidance of the Regional offices.
State support and guidance
Financial assistance is available to help
States start up noise control programs and once
underway, to assume the delegated function of
running the ECHO (Each Community Helps Others)
within the State. This will relieve the Regional
office of the task of servicing the communities of
that State from the Regional ECHO program, and will
allow the Region to assist communities through ECHO
in States where there is no active State program.
Community support
Financial assistance will be available to
enable communities to start up noise programs and
to add components to existing programs.
Other assistance programs which the Regions can use
are: workshops (probably through the Regional
Technical Centers) and mandated E.O. 11752
responses to State/local requests for assistance
with non-complying Federal facilities.
It is important for the Regions to develop for use
in FY 1980 a noise component in the State/EPA
agreements. At a minimum, such noise components should
be contained in all State/EPA agreements where there is
an active State noise control program. However, the
Regions should try to write in components even in those
States where there is not an active program in order to
lay the ground work for further work with the State
environmental agency, and to provide a framework for the
-------
- 390 -
assistance which the Region is providing to communities
in that State through such mechanisms as direct
technical assistance, ECHO, the Technical Assistance
Center, and financial assistance.
By FY 1980, at least nine States will be running
tbe ECHO program within their jurisdiction and four more
States will be developing an active noise control
program. Although regulatory activity by some States
may be appropriate in the area of motor vehicle control
and growth management, the principal focus of most State
programs should be the provision of assistance to
developing community noise control programs. The
Regions will also have to continue to provide assistance
to Headquarters in regulations development, perform
various public information functions, and review EIS's
for noise impact.
-------
- 391 -
NOISE PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS (PPA'S)
The Media Task Group has conscientiously reduced
the number of PPA's to enable each Regional Office to
develop plans to achieve its portion of the national
noise program through flexible use of the tools
contained in the Quiet Communities Act. Therefore, each
Region will be participating in some of these programs,
e.g., the ECHO program, "start-up" financial assistance,
and the QCP experiment, although all of these have been
dropped as PPA's. The details of each Region's use of
these tools will have to be worked out in internal
Regional planning, which will be oriented to the
achievement of the national objectives. Further, in
what is presently a one-person per Region program, there
are necessarily a great many "overhead" activities, such
as EIS review, planning, public response, etc., which
will have to be considered in planning for FY 1980 and
FY 1981, although this work is not included as a PPA.
PPA's will be used for FY 1980 Operating Plan and FY
1981 Budget.
Noise Regional Program Implementation (G210) D.U.
1. Number of active State noise programs
2. Number of active local noise programs
3. Number of "components" added to existing local noise
control programs
-------
- 392 -
APPENDIX 1
REGULATORY ACTIONS
Product
Wheel & Crawler
Tractor
Buses
Trash Compactors
Motorcycles
Lawnmowers
Truck Transport
Refrigeration
Units
Pavement Breakers
Proposed
Regulation
(NPRM)
7/77
9/77
8/77
3/78
(3QFY80)
Deferred
Final
Regulation
(NRM)
(2QFY81)
(2QFY80)
(4QFY79)
(2QFY80)
(3QFY81)
Medium & Heavy
Truck
(FY 1982)
(FY 1983)
Earliest
Possible
Effective
Date*
FY 1982
FY 1981
4QFY80
FY 1981
FY 1982
& Rock Drills
LNEP
Labeling, Hearing
Protectors
Labeling, General
Provisions
Labeling, One
Consumer Product**
Interstate Rail
Carrier
(3QFY80)
2/74
6/77
6/77
(2QFY80)
(3QFY79)
(3QFY81)
(4QFY79)
(3QFY79)
(3QFY79)
(2QFY81)
(4QFY79)
FY 1982
—
3QFY80
3QFY80
FY 1982
EPA doe
enforce
*Except for labeling all dates are subject to
change depending on regulatory options approved by
Administration and other timing factors.
**Either vacuum cleaners or air conditioners.
-------
- 393 -
Earliest
Proposed Final Possible
Regulation Regulation Effective
Product (NPRM) (NRM) Date
Light Vehicles Being studied
Tires Being studied
Other Consumer
Products Being studied
Chainsaws Being studied
Note: In addition to the products listed, in
FY 1979 and 1980 studies on a number of products will
continue since contracts were already awarded for these
in earlier fiscal years. These are being managed in
this fiscal year by a contractor. When completed the
contractor studies will be available to the Agency and
the public and may become the basis for regulation in
the post-FY 1981 period. These products are:
snowmobiles, motorboats, guided mass transit, vehicle
mufflers, portable air compressor (revision), and air
conditioner emission regulation, and earthmoving
equipment. Except for the management contract ($80K) no
funds will be spent on these actions in FY 1980. In
addition, a general survey study of industrial equipment
is being conducted in 1979 in order to allow the Agency
to assess its role in this area under Sections 6 and 8.
No further studies are planned for FY 1980.
-------
1980/1981 ENERGY MEDIA GUIDANCE
-------
ENERGY
MEDIA OVERVIEW
The Energy/Environment research and development program
was initiated in FY 75 following the recommendations of two
OMB/CEQ task forces -- one on pollution control technology
and the other on the environmental processes and effects of
energy pollutants. These recommendations were based on a
desire to develop needed control technology and health and
effects data necessary to help avoid an irreconcilable conflict
between energy supply and environmental protection interests.
Such a conflict seemed likely since it appeared that the nation
would necessarily be relying more heavily on the "dirtier" fuels
such as coal and oil shale and less on the cleaner domestic
gaseous and liquid fuels. This trend has been accelerated by
our national energy policy, which although only slowly evolving,
calls for a widespread conversion of utility and industrial
power facilities from scarce oil and gas to plentiful coal,
decreased fuel consumption, and in the longer term, the use
of technologies that are only now beginning to emerge for the
production of liquid and gaseous fuels from coal and oil shale.
Projections indicate that total U.S. coal mining activities
will increase from today's annual production of 700 million tons
to nearly 1 billion tons by 1985 and will more than double by
the year 2000. In 2000, conversion of existing utility and
industrial facilities from oil and gas to coal coupled with
construction of new conventional and advanced coal utilization
facilities will consume approximately 1.4 billion tons of coal
annually. Although conventional combustion of coal will
predominate, by the year 2000 emerging coal-based technologies
are projected to consume 300 million tons of coal per year.
These shifts in energy development and use pose potential
significant threats to human health in the next two decades.
Massive increases in coal and oil shale mining, off-shore
oil and gas prodution, and uranium extraction are all projected
by the year 2000. Intensified mining activity will create
erosion problems and generate runoff which can contaminate
surface waters. Aquifers may also be polluted as a result
of leachate or drainage from the mines themselves, or from
the improper disposal of mining wastes. Increased use of
coal by utilities, industries, and new technologies will
produce more air pollution and solid waste residue than are
currently produced. The pollutants expected to increase
are nitrogen and sulfur oxides, ashes, and sludges. Because
of the way they are formed, pollutants emitted from new
technologies can be varied and complex and may prove to be
even more harmful to human health than those emitted from
current technologies.
-------
- 398 -
To address the environmental threat associated with
energy and industrial pollution EPA's enabling legislation
has been toughened with the aim of tightening effluent and
emission limitations. The Clean Air Amendments of 1977,
the Resource Conservation Recovery Act and the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments will require improved
control of emissions, effluents and solid residuals.
The trend toward increased reliance on coal and other
potentially damaging fuels and technologies can only occur
without massive environmental impact if the necessary data
base is available to quantify effects and if affordable
control technology can be applied in a timeframe consistent
with technology utilization.
The following discusses major priorities of the FY 80-811
program in the control technology and effects programs.
CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
EPA's energy control technology program has the overall
goal of providing information of the types and quantities of
pollutants released by current and emerging energy supply
activities and where necessary, to develop control options.
The following delineates major research priorities in the
FY 80-81 timeframe for the six control technology subpro-
grams: flue gas sulfur control, nitrogen oxide control,
particulate control, environmental impacts of conventional
and advanced energy systems, fuel extraction and fuel
processing.
Flue Gas Sulfur Control
This program includes sulfur oxide pollution control
research and development relating to electric utility and
industrial power generation. Technology improvement is
important since EPA regulations are expected to require
from $2-4 billion in annual expenditures on relatively
immature SOX removal technology in the 1990's. Major
efforts are directed towards flue gas desulfurization
(FGD) technology development and assessment; assessment of
the capital and operating costs of FGD systems; research
and development directed towards increasing FGD system
reliability, reducing sulfur oxide emission levels and
reducing capital and operating costs. Special attention
should be paid on transferring information to the public
sector.
-------
- 399 -
o Research Priorities (Air)
1. Continue to issue quarterly updates of the
performance and status of existing FGD
systems for new FGD installations in the
U.S., Japan and Europe. Also continue
technology transfer program via symposia,
data books and seminars.
2. Document the full scale evaluation of the
adipic acid modified limestone FGD process
evaluation. Special attention will be given
to the economic impacts of this process
modification and any secondary operational or
environmental factors. Preliminary testing
indicates such an approach offers potential
of greater than 95% SOX control capability
at costs lower than current technology.
3. Complete the duel alkali evaluation program at
Louisville Gas and Electric. The final report
will provide an evaluation of performance and
economic factors; this technology offers
potential for cost and reliability advantages
over commercial lime and limestone FGD systems.
4. Complete the preliminary evaluation of dry
sulfur oxide control processes. Such processes
offer the promise of low cost energy-efficient
alternatives to commercial FGD systems,
particularly for low to moderate sulfur coals.
Nitrogen Oxide Control
This program includes research and development relating
to nitrogen oxide control from electric utility boilers,
industrial boilers, process furnaces, and other stationary
sources. Successful conduct of such a program is important
since NOX emissions from stationary sources are projected
to increase at an alarming rate over the next two decades.
This is primarily due to the projected increased combustion
of coal and the current absence of cost effective NOX control
technology.
o Research Priorities (Air)
Document the status of NOX control for utility
and industrial boilers to support the 1982/1983
review of the Standard of Performance for NOX,
as required by the Clean Air Act Amendments of
1977.
-------
- 400 -
2. Demonstrate the low NOX coal burner on two
industrial boilers and a utility boiler.
The program goal is an emission rate of 0.2
pounds of NOX per million BTU in a timeframe
compatible with possible revised NSPS in
the 1982/1983 timeframe.
3. Evaluate dry NOX control technology for
Stationary, high efficiency gas turbines
to support the Congressionally-mandated
review of the New Source Performance
Standard for Gas Turbines.
4. Demonstrate combustion modification concepts
to simultaneously reduce NOX and particulate
emissions from stationary internal combustion
engines.
5. Conduct assessment and applications testing of
combustion modification technology for stoker
coal-fired commercial and industrial boilers.
6. Continue bench-scale research and assistance
to California on the technical and economic
factors relating to flue gas treatment for
NOX and simultaneous NOX/SOX control. Such
processes offer the potential of greater than
90% NOX control albeit at substantial costs.
Particulate Control
The overall objective is to assess, improve and develop
technological methods for the control of all forms of man-made
(and induced) particulate matter; especially those controls
effective at minimizing emissions of inhalable size particu-
lates.
o Research Priorities (Air)
Characterize inhalable particulate matter
emissions from important energy and industrial
sources. Such information will be required to
allow selection of the appropriate control
technology to achieve a possible ambient '
inhalable particulate matter (fine) particulate
standard. Such a revised ambient standard is
under active evaluation by EPA.
-------
- 401 -
2. Evaluate the sources and controls for urban
fugitive dusts. Such sources are major
contributors to total suspended particulates
in certain urban locations.
3. Review the industrial and utility boiler
particulate control technology adequacy in
order to help the Air Program Office evaluate
the appropriateness of revising the NSPS in
1982/1983 timeframe.
4. Complete evaluation of a full scale baghouse
on low sulfur coal utility boilers, and continue
assessment of electrostatic enhancement of
fabric filtration for baghouse applications.
Baghouses represent the most cost-effective
control alternative for stringent particulate
emission limitations particularly for low
sulfur coal applications where ESPs are costly.
5. Complete the initial evaluation of after-treat-
ment particulate trapping devices for mobile
source diesel emission control, and assess the
prospect of their use to support an emission
standard for autos and trucks.
6. Continue assessment and development of flue gas
conditioning additives and the engineering
evaluation of a 30,000 SCFM electrostatic
precipitator (ESP) precharger for enhanced
particulate control. Subsequently, perform
evaluation of control enhancement options for
low sulfur coal boilers with low performance
ESPs.
7. Continue evaluation of optimized (S0x-Particu-
lates) mini-plant wet scrubber with the
objective of achieving the proposed 1979
Utility NSPS for particulates and SOX with
a single low-cost control device.
Environmental Impact of Conventional and Advanced
Energy Systems
The program includes the following four subprograms:
o Conventional combustion environmental assessments;
define environmental impacts of unregulated
pollutants from utility, industrial, commercial
and residential sources.
-------
- 402 -
Waste and water: define the impact and where
required evaluate/develop controls for the solid
waste and water residuals associated with coal
and oil combustion sources.
Conservation and advanced energy systems:
environmentally assess wastes-as-fuel, geothermal,
solar and other emerging non-fossil fuel energy
systems.
Integrated technology assessments: identify
environmentally, socially and economically
acceptable alternatives for meeting national
energy objectives.
Research Priorities
Air
1. Define the environmental impact of POMs,
heavy metals and direct sulfate emissions
from selected coal and oil combustion
sources.
2. Complete combustion source chemical and
bioassay studies for utility and industrial
coal and oil sources, aimed at comprehen-
sive screening for unregulated air
pollutants.
3. Define the environmental impact of
increased wood burning in industrial,
commercial and residential sources.
4. Define the air impact and evaluate control
of commercial and near-commercial waste
(municipal refuse) - as-fuel systems.
5. Define air impact and evaluate controls
for geothermal energy systems.
Water
Continue regulatory support efforts to
provide characterization data and control
technology information for the promulgation
and implementation of effluent guidelines
for the electric utility industry.
-------
- 403 -
2. Complete comprehensive combustion source
chemical and bioassay studies for utility
and industrial coal and oil sources aimed
at comprehensive screening for water
pollutants.
3. Continue limited assessment and control
technology evaluation for waste-as-fuel
and geothermal water pollution problems.
Solid Waste
1. Complete regulatory support program to
obtain sufficient data and information to
enable promulgation of guidelines or
regulations under RCRA for the storage,
treatment and disposal of coal ash and
scrubber waste from coal-fired electric
generators.
2. Evaluate second generation ash and scrubber
waste disposal approaches with the aim of
identifying more affordable and effective
techniques.
Multi-Media
1. Perform congressional-mandated analysis of
the Federal energy/environmental and con-
servation programs; present annual findings
to the Congress.
2. Extend coal technology, electric utility,
coal development and oil shale development,
integrated technology assessments (ITAs)
to evaluate impacts of energy conversion
technologies and development strategies
on residuals disposal, toxic and trace
elements levels and water use.
3. Extend the regional ITA of the Ohio River
Basin and Appalachia to identify energy-
development policy options for local,
state and regional governments.
-------
- 404 -
Fuel Processing, Preparation and Advanced Combustion
The program includes the characterization of effluents
and emissions, assessment of related environmental impacts,
and development and evaluation of necessary pollution control
technology for various emerging coal, oil shale and biomass
fuel processes. The results of this effort are used as input
on the Agency's standard setting process. Fuel processes
assessed include: (1) coal cleaning, (2) fluidized bed
combustion, and (3) synthetic fuels generation from coal,
biomass and oil shale.
o Research Priorities (Multi-Media)
1. Continue improving methods for sampling,
analysis and continuous monitoring of air,
water and solid waste effluents/residuals to
quantify total organics, characterize toxics
and determine inorganic compounds for coal
processing technologies .
2. Update multi-media pollution control guidance
document and environmental assessment report
(EAR) for first generation above ground and
in-situ oil shale processes.
3. Prepare multi-media pollution control guidance
document and environmental assessment reports
for low/high BTU coal gasification, coal
liquefaction and fluidized bed combustion
processes.
4. Evaluate air, water and solid waste environ-
mental problems and controls for coal
preparation (cleaning) plants.
5. Evaluate environmental problems and controls
for first generation biomass energy systems.
Extraction
The general objective of the extraction research program
is to assess, develop, identify, and verify control technology
for solid fuel, oil and gas extraction which will assure that
the recovery of the nation's fuel reserves is conducted in an
environmentally acceptable manner. To this end, equipment,
methods, and technology are assessed and developed to prevent,
control, and abate the discharge of environmental pollutants
from both point and non-point sources. Pollution sources
include facilities for exploration, production, storage, and
transportation of coal, uranium, oil shale, oil, and gas.
Both normal operations and accidental spills are examined.
-------
- 405 -
Research Priorities
Air
1. Characterize fugitive particulates by size
and chemical composition in extractive
processes.
2. Relate ambient particulates to sources.
3. Conduct fate and effect studies related for
extractive processes.
4. Evaluate fugitive process particulate
controls.
5. Evaluate the role of natural hydrocarbons
on 03 and aerosol problems.
Water
1. Evaluate the effects of Western coal and
oil shale extraction on surface and ground-
water quality.
2. Develop water quality monitoring network in
Western energy development areas.
3. Determine the best management practices for
surface mine sediment control.
4. Develop techniques for removal of toxic
materials from mine drainage.
5. Identify the best available technology for
the treatability of effluents.
Solid Waste
1. Determine adverse effects of solid waste
from mining.
2. Determine the best management practices
for solid waste from mining.
3. Assess methods for mining waste reduction,
recovery and reuse.
-------
- 406 -
HEALTH EFFECTS
The major thrust of the second five year effort should be
to respond to specific EPA and other agency research require-
ments. This trust will strengthen the utility and effective-
ness of the program. The second five year effort should be
closely coordinated with the base research programs both in
EPA and the other agencies.
During the course of the Interagency Steering Committee
Meetings helping to plan the FY 80-85 program, the non-EPA
members have voiced concern that appropriate sensitivity to
the interagency character of the program be recognized during
EPA's ZBB process. They remind us of their feelings that EPA's
ZBB process may not adequately reflect the priorities and
needs of other agencies participating in the program. The
research program should be sensitive to these concerns.
The following are the research objectives of the programs
identified by the four major subdivisions: Ecological Fate and
Effects, Air Transport and Fate, Monitoring and Instrumentation,
and Health Effects.
Ecological Fate and Effects - Research Priorities
Toxics
1. Development and validation of quick and
economical methodologies to test the biological
effects of toxic energy-related chemicals in
support of TOSCA's requirements to regulate
hazardous chemical substances and mixtures.
Air
Water
Evaluate the effects of energy-related air
pollutants on aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems
and their components in support of the Clean Air
Act requirements to prevent the significant
deterioration of air quality and the development.
of national ambient air quality standards.
Identify techniques to prevent adverse environ-
mental effects from coal mining operations in
support of the permanent regulation of the
Office of Surface Mining (DOI) and the develop-
ment of best management practices in support of
EPA's national water standards for the coal
mining industry.
-------
- 407 -
2. Assess the impact of energy-related consent
decree pollutants on various ecosystems in
support of EPA's development of the water
quality criteria documents.
3. Evaluate the effects of offshore oil and gas
exploration and extraction of marine environments
in support of EPA's requirements pertaining to
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System permit program.
Air Transport and Fate - Research Priorities
Air
1. Development of complex terrain air pollution
dispersion models to support the Agency's
efforts to establish environmental standards
based on sound scientific information and to
develop and evaluate abatement programs.
2. Development of regional (long-range) transport
and dispersion model to support Agency efforts
to understand the atmospheric transformation
and impact on visibility of pollutants origina-
ting from energy sources and to develop
standards and abatement strategies.
3. Fine particulates - studies to characterize
their formation, transport and affect visibility.
Output to support Agency fine particulate stand-
ard development.
4. Pollutant behavior studies - chemical and
physical atmospheric processes, field and chamber
studies. Output information for use in model
development. This includes studies of scrubbed
and unscrubbed plumes and of nucleation and
cloud phenomena.
Monitoring and Instrumentation - Research Priorities
Toxics
1. MAS - Master Analytical Scheme. Continuation of
development of this comprehensive and ultra-
sensitive GC/MS system for analysis of complex
organic molecules. The computerized detection
module of this sytem has a library of 50,000
fingerprints of the organic species most likely
-------
Air
- 408 -
to be found in environmental samples, including
many that are toxic or carcinogenic. This
powerful tool will be used by the Agency in
pseudo mass-balance studies to identify the
major sources of particular toxic substances
to assure that regulatory initiatives are
realistic and effective.
1. Visibility monitoring in Federal Class I areas
in support of Agency efforts to implement Clean
Air Act mandates for prevention of significant
deterioration.
2. Acid precipitation and dry deposition monitoring
in support of Agency efforts to identify the
ecological and economic impacts of acid
precipitation.
3. Fine Particulates - development of methodology
for monitoring the organic and nitrate fractions
in support of the Agency's efforts to understand
atmospheric transport and transformation of these
pollutants. The monitoring methodology also
supports agency efforts to devise and evaluate
abatement strategies.
4. Air quality baseline documentation for the
western area where intense energy development
activity is projected to occur by 1985 -
summaries and analysis of data obtained during
the first five years. This data will enable the
Agency to see and prove the environmental impacts
of energy developments.
Water
Development and implementation of a nationwide
anticipatory monitoring program for toxic
pollutants from energy developments (AMTES:
Anticipatory Monitoring for Toxics from Energy
Sources). The monitoring system will be used
to devise and evaluate abatement strategies
and to raise alarm flags to avert potential
catastrophes.
-------
- 409 -
Development of advanced monitoring systems and
strategies for particular field applications
related to new energy developments, e.g., OCS
drilling platforms, in-situ retorting. These
monitoring systems will support the NPDES
program.
Water Supply
1. Basin studies in the western energy development
areas to establish baseline hydrological and
chemical groundwater data in order to predict
impacts on groundwater of energy developments.
Energy developments threaten both the quality
and quantity of water supplies in the semi-arid
regions of the West which accelerated development
of vast energy resources is occurring.
Multi-Media
1. Multi-media development of monitoring and
instrumentation technology for energy source
monitoring and ambient monitoring for pollutants
from energy sources in support of Agency enforce-
ment activities and Agency efforts to evaluate
abatement programs.
2. Multi-media development of pollutant measurement
methodology in support of health effects,
ecological effects and transport, transformation
and fate studies of pollutants from energy
sources. These studies support the Agency's
efforts to establish environmental standards
based on sound scientific information and to
develop and evaluate workable and effective
abatement strategies.
Health Effects - Research Priorities
Toxics
Development of techniques to identify manufactured
agents/mixtures that can produce adverse effects
on human health.
-------
Air
- 410 -
2. Development of a data base to assist in
determining the impact on humans of specific
manufactured energy-related chemicals (and
mixtures) for specific biological endpoints
(birth defects, cancer, mutagenic effects).
These techniques/data are needed to provide
EPA support to the Toxic Substances Control
Act of 1976
Development of a data base to assist EPA in
establishing energy-related National Ambient
Air Standards. This data base enables the
development of reliable estimates of human
health damage functions for various population
groups through a balanced program in animal
toxicology, epidemiology and clinical studies.
Water
1. Development of techniques to identify waterborne
agents/mixtures that can produce adverse effects
on human health.
2. Development of a data base to assist in deter-
mining the impact of humans of energy-related
waterborne effluents (individual agents and
mixtures) for specific biological endpoints
(cancer, cardiovascular disease).
Solid Waste
1. Development of techniques for identification of
energy-related hazardous wastes that can produce
adverse effects on human health.
-------
1980/1981 INTERDISCIPLINARY MEDIA GUIDANCE
-------
- 413 -
INTERDISCIPLINARY
MEDIA OVERVIEW
The past years have seen the development of a growing
recognition that the Agency must improve its exploratory
research capabilities in parallel with integrating its
research and regulatory functions. Likewise, the development
of the regulatory decision process has come to require that
the risks, benefits and costs of EPA's regulatory decisions
be documented with improved methodologies and data. In
response to these developments ORD established its Anticipatory
Research program as a cornerstone in the development of a
long range research program and proposed the establishment
of an Office of Health and Environmental Assessment. During
this same period of time, operational components of the
Agency have recognized that segmented state grant mechanisms
did not always encourage innovative multimedia management
approaches for dealing with health and environmental problems.
The Agency accordingly proposed the Integrated Environmental
Assistance Act of 1979 to assure that alternative ways to
foster and support a total grant delivery approach. Finally,
an ongoing agency activity most representative of the inte-
grative approach needed to examine environmental problems,
is the environmental impact statement. Total NEPA compliance
and 309 Review activities relating to all media categories
are the overview responsibility of the Office of Federal
Activities.
MAJOR OBJECTIVES
o Develop an integrated exploratory research program
within ORD.
o Fully implement a health and ecological assessment
capability within ORD to serve program office
requirements.
o Coordinate environmental training programs throughout
the EPA by the National Workforce Development
Staff.
o Integrate new Council on Environmental Quality
regulations, Endangered Species Act regulations,
Historic Preservation regulations and the Executive
Orders on Floodplain Management and Wetlands
Protection in all NEPA programs.
-------
- 414 -
Implement the Integrated Environmental Assistance
Act emphasizing simple administration, enhanced
state program integration and flexibility and
incentives for good performance.
Develop and publish a set of Environmental Profiles,
-------
- 415 -
GUIDANCE FOR FEDERAL ACTIVITIES
This guidance relates to the total NEPA Compliance
and 309 Review activity and relates to a number of Media
categories. The elements in this program include (1)
the regulatory NEPA compliance program (all media)
(2) the nonregulatory NEPA compliance program (Water
Quality Media) , (3) the new source NEPA compliance and
EIS review programs in the regions (interdisciplinary
media)/ and (4) the Office of Federal Activities which
has oversight over the total program (Agency and
Regional Management Media). Guidance relating to the
regulatory EJS preparation program is described under
the Headquarters Abatement and Control Section end
guidance for nonregulatory EIS preparation, new source
EIS preparation and EIS review under the Regional
Abatement and Control Section. The Office of Federal
Activities oversight for these programs is described
under the Headquarters Agency and Regional Management
Section.
Planning Assumptions
Planning assumptions for the total program are
generally the same as in the past with the exception
of adjustments necessary to conform to the new Council
on Environmental Quality regulations, the Endangered
Species Act regulations, Historic Preservation regula-
tions, and the Executive Orders on Floodplain Manage-
ment and Wetlands Protection in all programs.
Media Priorities
Priorities and constraints are contained in the
following guidance for each program.
Major Objectives
NEPA Compliance — to assure that EPA's decisions
concerning (a) construction grants, (b) new source
discharge permits, and (c) selected regulatory actions
are environmentally sound and cost-effective and that
EPA's compliance with NEPA is timely and efficient.
EIS 309 Review — to assure that all Federal
actions are environmentally sound.
-------
- 416 -
HEADQUARTERS PLAN
Abatement and Control
Plans and priorities
NEPA Compliance Program (Air,
Water, Toxics, Noise, Solid Waste, Pesti-
cides, and Radiation)
Program direction for fiscal year 1980 is
generally consistent with the information
provided in the past. Continued emphasis
should be placed on integrating into EISs
other major supporting documentation (e.g.,
economic and health assessments) for a given
regulation (at least summaries of this other
documentation should be in the KIS) » This
comprehensive integrated analysis, which is
presented in EIS in a style suitable for
non-expert readers, wall contribute to
public understanding of Agency actions and
increase the public awareness that EPA does
consider a balanced set of impacts in devel-
oping environmental regulations.
- In order to comply with the new CEQ
EIS regulations, increased emphasis
should be put on the analysis of mean-
ingful alternatives and the preparation
of succinct EISs which under the* new
EIS regulations should be no more
than 150 pages in most cases.
- In order to comply with the recent
Executive Orders on wetlands and flood-
plains and the Agency's policy on
prime agricultural lands, impacts
affecting these areas should be high-
lighted in EISs.
EIS 309 Review Program
Increased emphasis on program offices'
review of major Federal projects to
insure consistency with EPA regulatory
programs and goals.
-------
- 41.7 -
Changes
No changes anticipated for fiscal year 1981.
Agency and Regional Management (OFA Oversight)
Plans and priorities
° Nonregulatory NEPA Compliance
- Revise 40 CFR Part 6 in accordance
with new CEQ regxilations arxcl new 20J
construction grants regulations.
- Review controversial EISs and findings
of no significant impact at the request
of CEQ, other Federal agencies. Con-
gress/ or citizens.
- Review the NEPA program in each region
annually for quality, efficiency, and
effectiveness.
- Develop interagency agreements for lead
agency EIS preparation as required.
- Provide training conferences for
regional offices.
- Manage contracts and resources to meet
regional office needs for contractor
assistance in preparing EISs and NEPA-
related studies.
- Revise Manual for Preparation of EIS
for 201 Construction Grants Projects
in accordance with new CEQ regulations
and new 201 construction grants regula-
tions.
- Provide guidance and assure conformance
with other environmental laws (Endan-
gered Species, Historic Preservation,
Floodplain Management, and Wetlands
Protection).
P New Source NEPA Compliance
- Revision of new source regulations:
-------
- 418 -
— to conform to new CEQ regulations
— to conform to proposed new NPDES
permit regulations
-- to require pre-construction review
— to encourage scoping
— to coordinate air and water new
source reviews,
— to encourage tiering and area-
wide EISs
- Complete development of technical
guidelines and appendices for selected
new source industries.
- Manage contracts and resources to meet
regional office needs for contractor
assistance in EIS preparation.
- Provide guidance and conduct new source
EIS training conference for regional
staff.
- Provide guidance and assure conformanee
with other environmental laws (Endan-
gered Species, Historic Preservation,
Floodplain Management, and Wetlands
Protection).
Regulatory NEPA Compliance
- Continue to review selected EISs.
Emphasis will be placed on EISs pre-
pared under more recent laws, i.e.,
TSCA and RCRA.
- Finalize revision to Regulatory EIS
Procedures to address changes precipi-
tated by the new CEQ EIS regulations
and continue to provide guidance on
compliance with the Agency's Regula-
tory EIS Procedures.
309 Review Program
- Continue to review Federal agency
regulations and controversial National
level projects, clear regional EIS
-------
- 419 -
comments, conduct headquarters liaison,
and provide assistance to regions in
framing 309 determinations and other
significant adverse comments, with
special attention to energy, water
resources, and major transportation
and community development projects.
- Negotiate 309 referrals and follow up
with CEQ and sponsoring agencies.
- Provide guidance and follow up on the
EPA implementation of the CEQ
regulations.
- Continue development and up-dating of
policy (309 Review Manual) and techni-
cal guidelines.
- Provide guidance and continue to
operate Official Piling System.
Changes
In the EIS 309 review program, there will be
a significant emphasis in program oversight
related to improving the EIS assistance/review
interface in fiscal year 1981. In the NEPA
compliance programs, there will only be minor
changes in oversight activities. In all programs,
regulations, guidance, manuals, etc. will be re-
vised and updated as necessary to conform to
any revisions in existing or new laws.
REGIONAL GUIDANCE
Abatement and Control
Regional priorities
° Nonregulatory NEPA Compliance
Program direction for fiscal year 1980 is
generally consistent with last year
except that the regions are being allowed
more flexibility in the design of their
specific program to accomplish the objec-
tives.
-------
- 420 -
The principal program involves preparation
of 201 facilities plan EISs. 208 areawide
planning grant EISs and Clean Lakes program
EISs will be prepared only as resources
permit.
Regions should strive for early environmental
review of projects during the planning phases
and should promote the preparation of piggy-
back EISs wherever EISs are to be prepared.
Emphasis should also be placed on coordi-
nating EPA project planning with the planning
efforts of other Federal agencies to provide
for better environmental reviews of the
cumulative effects of Federal actions. WhiXe
the principal objectives of the environmental
review process should be improved pro-
jects either with or without an EIS, the
Agency's output of EISs relative to the size
of the program is still so low that we must
continue to strive to prepare more EISs when
resources are available to do so.
Even though we have an EIS exemption on
each, some Regional Administrators have
decided to do EISs on Clean Lakes grants and
208 areawide planning grants because of
some of the significant adverse impacts
these projects can cause. The general
approach on such grants should be to have the
applicant prepare an assessment (paid for
with grant funds as an eligible cost) and
if an EIS is prepared use the assessment as
a principal input to the EIS. Unfortunately,
the EPA contract funds for EISs are already
assigned to the mandatory EIS programs.
Funds for Clean Lakes and 208 areawide
planning grant EISs will be available only
if expenditure patterns in other areas are
less than planned.
Solid waste demonstration grant EIS activi-
ties are handled at headquarters.
Consistent with available resources, each
region should develop a mix of the following
activities that will minimize the adverse
environmental impacts of proposed actions;
-------
- 421 -
however, EISs must be prepared on at least
some projects.
- Attempt to identify need for EISs
during Plan of Study development. If
not possible during this phase, do so
as early as possible in order to
minimize project delays.
- Conduct pre-application (201) confer-
ences to identify those actions requir-
ing EISs.
- Prepare draft and final EISs with
appropriate mitigation measures.
- Attempt to prepare piggyback EISs for
construction grant projects.
- If no EIS is required, prepare findings
of no significant impact with appropri-
ate mitigation measures.
- Assure that all Federal requirements
regarding wetlands, floodplains, agri-
cultural land, wild and scenic rivers,
historic and archeological sites, and
endangered species are considered for
all projects.
- Review and monitor NEPA compliance by
States with 201 delegation. Make NEPA
decision for 201 projects for all States,
- Obtain the review of all affected re-
gional staffs before issuing findings
of no significant impact, notices of
intent, draft EISs, and final EISs.
New Source NEPA Compliance
Program direction for fiscal year 1980 is
generally consistent with last year except
that the regions are being allowed more
flexibility in the design of their specific
program to accomplish the objectives.
Consistent with available resources, each
region should develop a mix of the following
-------
- 422 -
activities that will minimize the adverse
environmental impacts of proposed actions;
however, EISs must be prepared on at least
some projects.
- Identify potential new sources as
early as possible.
- Conduct pre-application conferences.
- Coordinate with other Federal agencies,,
organize and attend scoping meetings.
- Make new source determinations accord-
ing to New Source Task Force Initia-
tives.
- Attempt to obtain third party EISs.
- Conduct environmental reviews of all
new sources to determine if they will
significantly affect the environment~
- If it is determined that the project "
will not have any significant environ-
mental effects, prepare findings of no
significant impact fully justifying
the decision.
- Prepare notices of intent/ and draft
and final EISs.
- Obtain reviews by all affected regional
staffs before findings of no significant,
impact, notice of intent, draft EISs
and final EISs.
- Assure that all Federal requirements
regarding wetlands, floodplains, agri-
cultural land, wild and scenic rivers,
historic and archeological sites, and
endangered species are considered for
all new sources.
- Participate in other agency's EISs in
accordance with negotiated lead agency
agreements.
- Utilize areawide EISs when appropriate. ™
-------
- 423 -
° EIS 309 Review
Program direction for fiscal year 1980 is
generally consistent with last year except
that the regions are being allowed more
flexibility in the design of their specific
program to accomplish the objectives. Par-
ticularly close attention should be paid to
pre-EIS liaison related to highly contro-
versial projects which involve critical
areas of emerging national policy/ have
significant and/or mult i~ media effects,
and/or concern several agencies. Examples
are coal-fired and nuclear power plants,
transportation projects, and actions which
involve wetlands and prime farmland.
Consistent with available resources, each
region should develop a mix of the follow-
ing activities that will minimize the
adverse environmental impacts of proposed
actions.
- Timely Reviews — Timely, high quality
reviews which make use of all available
expertise.
- Pre-Draft Liaison -- Scoping, particu-
larly for projects expected to have
significant adverse environmental
effects, e.g., energy, water resource,
and major transportation and community
development projects,. ETS coox'dinators
should be familiar with new CEQ regula-
tion requirements and planning systems
and processes of other Federal agencies
Liaison — Negotiating
differences with originating agency
which resulted from review of the draft
EIS. Enables EPA to be aware of timing
of issuance of the final EIS.
~ CEQ Reg Ij^terpre^tations — Advise and
assist the public and other interested
parties on interpreting CEQ regulations,
including deterrninirc need for EIS, etc.
-------
- 424 -
Coordinating Environmental Reviews —
Develop closer link between EIS reviews
and related environmental reviews such
as new source reviews, 109(j) determina
tions, and 404 reviews.
Cooperating Agency — Technical assis-
tance in critical areas where EPA's
technical input can significantly im-
prove the quality of an agency's plans
and projects.
Referring Bad Projects — Refer to OFA
those projects rated "ED" or "3" at
draft EIS review stage or "environmen-
tally unsatisfactory" at final EIS
review stage.
Post-EIS Follow-up — Selectively
follow up at the post-EIS stage on key
projects to assure that crucial mitiga-
tion measures are incorporated as
promised in final F.ISs; report criti-
cal discrepancies to OFA. Periodically
monitor projects of a continuing nature
(e.g., navigation projects) to acquire
new information and identify need for
project modifications.
-------
- 425 -
REGIONAL PROJECTED PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHEMNTS
NEPA Compliance
I/ Number of draft EISs prepared on construction, grants
(output commitment required).
Number of final EISs prepared on construction grants.
2/ Number of findings of no significant impact on
construction grants.
I/ Number of draft EISs prepared on NPDES new source
permits (output commitment required).
Number of final EISs prepared on NPDES new source
permits.
2/ Number of findings of no significant impact on NPDES
new source permits.
Number of draft EISs prepared on other regional
office actions.
Number of final EISs prepared on other regional
office actions.
EIS Review
Number of draft EISs reviewed.
Number of final EISs reviewed.
I/ Percent of draft EISs reviewed on time (output
commitment required).
"L/ Percent of final EISs reviewed on time (output
commitment required).
Number of draft EISs reviewed where the project
was rated environmentally unsatisfactory (EU)
Number of draft EISs reviewed where the project
was rated environmental reservations (ER) .
-------
- 426 -
Number of draft EISs reviewed where the EIS was
rated inadequate information (3).
Number of final EISs reviewed where comments
indicated environmental reservations (ER) with the
project.
Number of final EISs reviewed where the project
was found unsatisfactory and was referred to CEQ.
Number of final EISs rated unresponsive.
Number of draft EISs with significant scoping
sessions.
I/ Output commitment required. A
2/ Regions or GIGS must provide this, data — all
other data will be provided by OFA.
-------
- 427 -
CONSOLIDATED GRANT PROGRAMS
Implementation of Consolidated State Grant Programs
The number of EPA state grant programs has grown from
three programs with a grant authority of $60 million in 1978
to 116 programs with grant authority of nearly $300 million.
There is growing awareness of the complexity of the cross-
media impacts of these programs as well as the seriousness
of the impacts to health and the environment. Implementa-
tion of the Integrated Environmental Assistance Act would
enable the states to decide whether or not to apply for
integrated assistance grants and which programs to include;
would require the States to submit an integrated program
plan as part of its assistance application and to consult
with local governments as the integrated plan is developed.
It will be important to have greater opportunities for local
government to participate as part of a total state environ-
ment program. Finally, the integrated assistance projects
must be awarded on a nationally competitive basis.
o Plans and Priorities - FY 80
Develop Regulations, Policies, and Procedures
to implement the Act in conjunction with
regional inputs.
Headquarters will review, rank and select
supplemental assistance proposals.
- Regions will assist state and local govern-
ments in preparing applications including
integrated work programs.
Regions will review applications and award
integrated assistance.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROFILE S
The Agency must continue to improve its communication
with the public on status and trends in environmental pollution
and its reversal. Not only must our citizens know of the
success of their commitment to clean up their air, land, and
waterways, they n\ut also be aware of how much is left to be
done.
EPA and its State partners collect data on ambient
levels of many pollutants. For the most part we aggregate
these data at the national level for use in policy review
and program planning. We have not made sufficient use of
-------
- 428 -
this unique resource to allow the public to assess for
itself whether the environment is improving, and how quickly.
Currently, Regional staff are engaged in an intensive
review of our ambient data to design model "Environmental
Profiles," arraying status and trend information in clear,
easily used graphics to describe pollution levels in discrete
geographic areas (such as counties). In FY 79 at least
four, and as many as six Regions will publish pilot Regional
profiles. From these Regional reports Headquarters will
derive a partial National profile for internal review. The
Agency will distribute the Regional publications, and 0PM
will conduct an intensive evaluation of their reception and
use by influential readers such as State legislators, news
reporters, and public interest groups. Our purpose is to
determine if these information "gatekeepers" can use the
Profiles to communicate patterns of environmental change to
the general public on a small scale geographic basis.
Depending upon the results of the pilot, the Adminis-
trator will decide whether to publish compatible Environ-
mental Profiles in all Regions in FY 1980 and beyond. If he
so decides, the FY 1980 Operating Plan will change accord-
ingly. In FY 81, Regions not involved in the pilot should
plan to devote 2.5 work years and $25,000. Each Region
should also devote an appropriate amount for distribution.
-------
- 429 -
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
Development of an Exploratory Research Capability
We have made important progress in the past year in
starting the process of building an exploratory research
capability. Within the Anticipatory Research Program initi-
ation of the Center Support Program provides us with the
beginning of a long term research program in critical areas
to serve as a foundation for our applied research in support
of regulations. It will become an increasingly important
link to the best institutions in the academic community in
the future. Internally, the Innovative Research Program is
providing new opportunities for our own scientists to surface
basic research proposals and unique ideas. Finally, more
mature multidisciplinary programs aimed at assessing antici-
pated problems have begun to focus on areas likely to be of
growing future concern.
Since these advances provide the underpinnings to our
ability to ultimately get ahead of our future problems, we
must be careful of their design and assure that the best
scientific talent of the country participates in their
development. Moreover, our efforts to identify new prob-
lems must also take advantage of the government wide re-
sources devoted to similar undertakings in offices such as
the Office of Technology Assessment, National Science Founda-
tion and Congressional Research Service. We must articulate
our research interests to the scientific community with
increasing clarity and assure through greater competition
that the best scientific proposals are awarded. Finally,
there remains the task of assuring that exploratory research
conducted within all media is integrated into a compre-
hensive effort. This task must focus on identifying exploratory
research across all areas and assuring that those problem
areas in need of fundamental research are adequately supported.
o Plans and Priorities - FY 80
- Provide increased competition and improved
peer review of EPA grant programs.
Implement Center Support activities initiated
in FY 79 and establish four (4) new centers
for long-term research.
- Expand Innovative Research activities pro-
viding for increased ORD participation by
Laboratory and extramural scientists.
Integrate Acid Rain and Cancer Program research
programs.
-------
- 430 -
o Plans and Priorities - FY 81
Integrate long range research conducted
through the Public Health Initiative, Antici-
patory Research and Base Programs into explora-
tory research program.
Implementation of a Health and Ecological Assessment Capability
The scientific assessment program is made up of two
distinct but interrelated operations: a criteria and assess-
ment development activity; and a special assessment activity
on risk and exposure. In FY-79 OHEA (Office of Health and
Environmental Assessment) was proposed to institutionalize
both the existing Cancer Assessment Group and Environmental
Criteria and Assessment Office scientific assessment pro-
grams and the new 1979 initiatives (ECAO-CIN, Reproductive
Effects Risk Assessment, Exposure Assessment). FY 1979 was
a start-up year for the new programs with the ECAO-CIN
developing proposed water quality criteria for the 65
Consent Decree Chemicals, the Reproductive Risk Assessment
Group developing guidelines for Agency wide adoption and the
Exposure Assessment Group initiating methodology devel-
opment.
The entire scientific assessment program is Program
Office oriented in its outputs. The needs are articulated
by the others and converted into work plan priorities.
FY 1981 should see a strengthening of the Agency's
capability to develop health related assessments in a uniform
and consistent manner. The quality control afforded by OHEA
either through the ECAO programs or the special risk groups
assessment will be apparent. The capability for exposure
assessments, and estimating total body burdens etc. will
likely be much improved on an Agency wide basis as we approach
the end of FY-80 and look into 1981. For planning purposes
OHEA expects to receive raore requests for assistance from
the program offices in the development of assessments.
Moreover, as we approach FY 1981, ORD anticipates that
effects other than carcinogenic and reproductive impairment
will be emerging for regulatory analysis. Pulmonary, neuro-
logical, and cardiovascular effects are likely candidate
areas. The establishment of a special assessment group for
these health areas appears appropriate as a final step in
the development of this capability. OHEA functional state-
ments provide for this event.
-------
- 431 -
o Plans and Priorities — FY 80
Fully implement a scientific assessment
capability in the area of Carcinogenesis and
Reproductive Risk Assessments.
Fully implement a scientific assessment
capability to conduct Exposure Assessments.
o Plans and Priorities - FY 80
- Expand scientific assessment capability to
include pulmonary, neurological and cardi-
ovascular effects.
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
In the next two years the Office of Research and
Development will take steps in four broad areas: (1) move
more education, employment, and training on environmental
subjects into the self-supported systems; (2) coordinate the
full range of training in the Agency - including enforcement
related training; (3) expand the use of workforce planning
tools in Integrated Environmental Assistance and State-EPA
Agreements; and (4) determine the shortages likely to occur
in highly specialized environmental occupations.
o Plans and Priorities - FY 80
Expansion of the Senior Environmental Employ-
ment Program to all 50 States by 1980.
Establishment of a strong Co-op Education
Program for State and local environmental
agencies.
Publication of a guide to extra-agency
resources.
Preparation of composite training plans
across program lines, e.g., hazardous waste
dumps; hazardous spills, enforcement.
Identify with the regions non-compliance
situations related to human resource deficiencies
and promote with the regions education and
training on topics such as I/M, hazardous
waste management, land application of waste
water, and waste treatment plant operations.
o Plans and Priorities - FY 81
Continue FY 80 initiatives.
-------
1980/1981 MANAGEMENT GUIDANCE
-------
- 435 -
MANAGEMENT
MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW
The primary goal of management is to help the
Agency achieve its environmental objectives over the
long run. To accomplish this goal in the context of
a decentralized, yet effectively integrated, management
system we need to strengthen our analytic capacity
and our capacity to provide services in several areas.
The body of this Guidance addresses primarily those
priority areas which we believe must be strengthened,
recognizing that we must continue to carry out our
ongoing management activities in an effective way.
The remainder of this overview identifies the
major planning assumptions on which this Guidance is
based, and the major priorities for FY I960 and 1981.
Planning Assumptions
This Guidance is based on a number of planning
assumptions, most of which carry forward from the base
program. We believe, however, that we should highlight
our major assumptions because of their impact, on planning
o The Agency will continue to stress integrated,
decentralized management.
o We must implement several key provisions of
the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 during
FY 1980/81—particularly the Senior Executive
Service, Merit Pay, Performance Appraisal and
increased recruitment of minorities and women.
o we will stress increased delegation of contract
management responsibilities to the Regions
when volume and capacity warrant it.
o We will put in place a complete system of
management information and accountability
during FY 1979 and early in FY 1980.
o The ZBB process will become less resource
intensive; its focus will shift to workload
analysis and substantive budget justification.
o We will continue to work toward passage
of the Integrated Environmental Assistance
Act.
-------
- 436 -
o The Agency will continue to emphasize developing
analytic capacity in the Regional offices.
By the end of FY 1979, three Regions should
have improved capabilities well under way, and
at least two additional Regions should have
strengthened their analytic capability in
FY 1960.
o Significantly greater emphasis will be placed
on the analysis of the benefits of environmental
regulation in FY 1980 and 19fal.
o This Guidance does not reflect conclusions and
recommendations from the Staff Offices study
presently under way.
o During FY 1981, the Agency must substantially
complete the systems development process to
replace the present ADP capacity within
the constraints of the OMB A-109 process.
o Support services estimates for FY 1981
(including ADP Timesharing) will reflect cost
increases attributable to inflation similar
to that experienced in recent years.
o Budget estimates for basic Agency services
(personnel, contracts, support services, etc.)
should be based on providing services for
current levels of employment and program
activity. Expansion (or contraction) in these
service areas to meet changing employment or
program activity levels will be factored into
the Agency's overall budget estimates as a
final step in the ZBB process after overall
budget levels are determined.
Management Priorities
As with all programs, priority needs inevitably
outstrip resources. As a result, it is important
to identify the areas of highest priority. Although
the body of this Guidance describes them more
completely, the following are our highest priorities:
o Implementing the Civil Service Peform Act
effectively, in order to improve our manage-
ment accountability and performance;
-------
- 437 -
o Providing the information systems and evaluation
capacity to enable us to hold ourselves, as
well as State and local governments, accountable;
o Strengthening the management/analytic capa-
bilities in the Regions to enable the Regional
Administrators to better evaluate their programs,
manage their Regions, deal with the increasingly
complex job of integrating their programs, and
participate equally in Agency-wide policy
and management decision making;
o Continuing to refine ZBB to channel Agency
energies less toward process and more toward
substance;
o Developing and testing ways to improve our
contracting process, improving responsiveness
and cutting processing time;
o Developing practical alternative regulatory
approaches to the traditional "command and
control" model as a key contribution to
regulatory reform;
o Improving the state-of-the-art in regulatory
decision making, especially with respect to
benefits analysis;
o Implementating the Integrated Environmental
Assistance Act as a key management tool for
integration of Agency programs in the Regions;
o Building stronger linkages among the management
processes and among the 0PM analytical/management
groups.
Regulatory reform is an especially important part of
the management priorities, and it cuts across several
of the elements of management guidance. The Integrated
Environmental Assistance Act will provide Regional
Administrators with a flexible negotiating tool which
should enable them to deal more effectively with the
States. We will direct substantial analytic effort
toward generating, testing, evaluating, and implementing
ways to obtain more environmental protection at the
same or lower cost, particularly in the area of controlled
trading initiatives. We will be renovating the Agency
-------
- 438 -
reporting system with an eye toward eliminating burden
some, duplicative and unnecessary reporting. The
General Counsel will also place a high priority on
reform activities.
PLANNING GUIDANCE
Personnel Management
The primary objective in personnel management is
to help the Agency use its personnel resources in
such a way as to maximize their contribution to our
environmental objectives over the long run. The major
thrust of our personnel management system through
FY 1981 will be to implement the various elements
of the new Civil Service Reform Act to improve our
management of personnel. Four tasks rank as the
highest priority:
o Implement a system that will enable
individuals to achieve an understanding
with their supervisors as to the work for
which they will be held accountable during
the year. Such a written understanding will
form a rational basis for accountability,
performance rating and rewards.
- Establish standards for all EPA staff by
the middle ot the first quarter, FY 1980.
This will be the result of each person,
working with his or her supervisor,
deciding the details and basis for
accountability during the year.
- Give ratings to all staff based on
standards by the end of FY 1980.
This will be the key to each indivi-
dual's understanding of whet he or she
has accomplished during the year,
and will serve as a basis for rewards
and training.
- Using the standards developed for FY 1980
as a basis, develop FY 1981 standards,
starting the latter part of FY 1980 for all
staff. Complete the process by the end
of 1980. These standards will govern
employees during FY 1981.
-------
- 439 -
- Develop systems and processes to ensure that
the performance management system is operating
and implemented, including development of
monitoring procedures.
- Design a mechanism for using the performance
management system to identify promotion
potential and training programs.
- Develop policy and guidance documents dealing
with SES, performance management, Career
Development, Labor Relations, and the like.
Headquarters must work closely with the
Regions on this task.
o Implement all aspects of the Senior Executive
Service including classification, recruitment,
placement, career development, and the establish-
ment and management of two new Agency-wide boards;
- Performance Review Board, which makes
recommendations on performance ratings and
on performance awards.
- Executive Resources Board, which has responsi-
bility for managing and establishing policy
for managing the executive resources of the
Agency consistent with delegations from the
Administrator.
o Recruit minorities and women into professional
and high level positions. Vve have made progress,
but must do better at both Headquarters and
Regional levels. New legislation mandates
increased efforts. All Headquarters and
Regional offices will need to develop detailed
plans and goals for recruiting, working with
the Office of Civil Rights and the Office of
Personnel Management.
o Examine our normal day-to-day operations to
ensure that our programs are receiving needed
services and that we are increasing effective-
ness and finding efficiencies in their
management.
-------
- 440 -
A variety of other activities will also be
important during FY 80/81. The new reform law allows
agencies to propose demonstrations for Office of Personnel
Management approval. The demonstrations permit testing
a variety of new approaches to improve the personnel
system, such as expansion of merit pay to employees
other than those now eligible. These demonstrations,
if we begin them, will reauire resources and must be
carefully evaluated for planning and implementation.
Labor-management relations are also affected by the
new law. We will need to be certain that our staff
understands the new elements of the law and is trained
to implement it.
To support a stronger EPA/State/local environ-
mental regulatory effort, we should build on existing
mechanisms (e.g. group IPAs) to encourage personnel
interchange and training. That interchange should be
encouraged between EPA programs and Headquarters and
Regions as well as between levels of government as
a means of developing career paths.
It will be very important that members of our
management group in fact have an opportunity to become
environmental managers through individual mobility and
other developmental opportunities. Advancement will be
available as individuals travel their planned career
paths and gain valuable experience in different programs
and in different geographic areas. Individuals will
need to play a key role in the planning of their career
paths, working with Agency top management as they
fashion their futures.
We also hope to establish an Environmental
Executive Service—a special high potential employee
program—for developing a group of highly qualified
employees in all environmental disciplines and a
parallel program for employees in some of our more
specialized areas, e.g., senior professionals in
nonmanagerial research positions and our many
attorneys.
The Office of Personnel Management has issued
several new regulations that will affect a number
of internal policies, especially our merit promotion
plan. The plan will need to be revised and implemented
throughout the Agency. We will need to train all
our supervisors, managers, and employees on the new
policies and programs.
-------
- 441 -
The Office of Personnel Management will be
generating another key activity because of the
required revision of classification standards. The
environmental engineer, mechanical engineer, chemist,
clerical, and secretarial standards have recently
been revised and the Agency must evaluate all present
positions in relation to these standards. The same
task will need to be done for most of our positions
by the end of 1961. We will look at the possibility
of encouraging mobility between programs by building
cross-media tasks into our classification standards
in some specialties.
Region Specific Guidance — All of the tasks
outlined have major implications for both Headquarters
workload and for all of the staff in the Regions. As
a result of the many changing ground rules, special
strain will be placed upon the Regional personnel staffs
who will have a major role and responsibility to assure
achievement of our objectives. Performance appraisal
standards must be developed, ratings must be given and
standards must be updated annually. It will be especially
important that we ensure careful and effective communi-
cation between Regions and Headquarters during these
difficult transitional reform years.
ContractsManagement
The key contracts management objective is to
help the Agency manage its contract resources in such
a way as to maximize their contribution to our
environmental objectives over the long run.
The major thrust in Contracts Management will
be toward improving the service to "client"
organizations. Priorities for the Contracts Management
activity during FY 1980/81 will be:
o Improving the responsiveness and efficiency
of the Headquarters contract acquisition
process;
o Continuing efforts to devise and intro-
duce contract acquisition strategies
that are more responsive to program
needs and that promote improved
contractor efficiency and quality of
performance;
-------
- 442 -
o Strengthening Regional procurement and
continuing the delegation of increased
procurement authority to the Regions
where justified by need and Regional
capability;
o Developing program office capacity in
contracts acquisition and management;
o Upgrading the post-award monitoring of
contracts.
The Headquarters Contracts Management function
will take a number of steps to improve the responsive
ness and efficiency of our contracting:
o Undertake during Fi 1979 an experiment in
the use of a voucher system for allocating
contracting staff resources. The results
of this experiment will determine the extent
to which a voucher system is adopted in
Agency contracting operations in FY 1960
and 1961.
o Station resident procurement advisors
in all Headquarters program offices that
are major participants in the contract
acquisition process.
o Review and, as appropriate, revise contract
policies, procedures and resource allocations
in order to reduce procurement lead times.
o Develop workload measures that reflect
variations in procurement complexity as
well as dollar size and provide a credible
basis for adjusting contract work force
in response to workload increases.
o Revise procurement planning and reporting
processes to —
- Improve accountability for procurement
activities in which program offices
and contracts personnel share responsi-
bility.
- Reorient the Headquarters contracts
organizations and processes to a client-
centered mode of operation.
-------
- 443 -
o Continue to work with program offices to
consolidate procurement requirements into
broad program or mission-oriented require-
ments rather than narrowly defined tasks.
o Increase use of award fee contracts and
other strategies that are designed to
motivate contractors to deliver the
quality of service or product represented
in their proposal.
We will try to strengthen Regional procurement
further with continued delegation of increased pro-
curement authority to the Regions. We expect to
continue and expand the delegation of procurement
authority to field units, commensurate with their
development of the requisite expertise, organizational
capacity, and needs. We will strengthen programs
for periodic review of Regional procurement and couple
these reviews with on-site technical assistance to
address needed improvements.
One of the most important initiatives for
improving service will be improving program office
capacity in contracts acquisition and management.
We will initiate several key activities:
o Conduct expanded training of project officers
with emphasis on definition of require-
ments, technical evaluation, and contractor
management.
o Establish a pre-review process to provide
coordination of contracts and program
requirements at a time that permits resolution
without risk to program priorities.
o Establish DAA-level review and coordination
of major contract acquisitions to ensure
that problem areas are speedily addressed
before becoming major delays.
o Strengthen program office involvement in
selection.
Finally, we will upgrade the post-award
contracts monitoring function to offset loss of
traditional leverage (i.e., annual competition)
over contractor performance that is inherent in
-------
- 444 -
the mission contract concept, and we will reinforce
project officer authority and accountability for
contractor performance.
Resources Management
The primary objective in Resources Management
is to help the Agency manage its total resources
in such a way as to maximize their contribution to
environmental objectives over the long run.
There are five areas of highest priority
for Resources Management:
o Refining and improving the Agency's
resource allocation process;
o Actively participating in inter-agency
and cross-agency ZBB;
o Rebuilding the top management information
and accountability systems;
o Working toward implementing the
Integrated Environmental Assistance
Act;
o Strengthening the budget execution process.
The following text elaborates on the five key
areas, and outlines the roles of Headquarters and
the Regions. In addition, a number of other
priorities for both Headquarters and Regional
Resources Management are listed, together with
a summary of Region-specific guidance.
Improving Resource Allocation -- As one of the
Agency's two critical cross-cutting decision-making
processes, Zero-Base Budgeting will continue to be
the focus of the Agency's resource allocation. In
cooperation with the program offices and the Regions,
0PM will continue to refine the existing system to
reduce the apparent deficiencies, paperwork burdens,
and time commitments; meet OMB requirements; and
accommodate changes in management style or program
emphasis within EPA. These refinements must take
into account the need to reduce the workload which
the ZBB now imposes on personnel at all levels within
the Agency and to streamline ZBB wherever possible
-------
- 445 -
while maintaining it as an open process in which
line managers participate fully in decision making.
Previously, ZBb has focused heavily on the
process. how that the process is well established,
it should focus more on substantive analysis.
Both headquarters and the Regions should continue
to develop analytical capabilities so that we
allocate resources using the best available
information. To assist in this process, we will
focus this year on developing and working througn
both an analytic agenda end workload analyses.
The Peaions shoula expect to play a major role
in assisting in the development of the analytic
agenda and various worKload analyses. In addition,
the Regions snould become more active in regulation
development and review, especially regarding resource
issues .
Participating in inter- and cross-agency ZEE --
In the FY 1960 oudget process, LFA profited signi-
ficantly from participating in OMB's initial inter-agency
ZBB (of all programs at the margin) ana cross-agency
ZEB (of related programs). vve expect CME's inter-agency
and cross-agency ZBB to be more sophisticated in
f"l 19bl. Ihis year, tnerefore, we will identify and
recommend new areas for cross-agency and inter-agency
Z6B--areas in which our experience tells us we should
do well.
Because of this, CPH must also invest in
helping OftE define better and more open processes
for conducting these ZBb efforts, and provide staff
and otner support fcr them. This will include identifying
specific issues useful to OhB staff and providing
the analysis necessary to clarify and resolve them.
The program offices, in coordination with GPM, should
be prepared to invest time in making these inter-
and cross-agency ZBE's work well, since as a new,
lean agency we can expect to receive additional
resources from tnerc, just as we did last year.
Renovating the Agency Reporting System — We
must give highest priority to rebuilding our management
information and accountapilitv system so that it
will --
-------
- 446 -
o Provide useful information for all the
Agency's managers in ah -.cfily understandable
form.
o Reflect measures of environmental
improvement which substantially reflect
Agencywide goals and program achievements,
rather than merely "count beans".
o Support our performance evaluation system,
ZBB process, workload analysis, State/EPA
agreements, and the changes which we hope
will result when passage of the Integrated
Environmental Assistance Act is passed.
o Eliminate burdensome, duplicative, and
unnecessary reporting.
The Assistant Administrators, Regional
Administrators, States, and localities should have
accountability systems of their own, since they must
be able to identify their own commitments and know
whether they are being achieved. The Agency-wide
system should build upon rather than duplicate these
efforts, reflecting more aggregated data than our
managers must have for their own needs. Vie must
avoid duplicative and wasteful information gathering.
We are too far into FY 1979 to put in place a full-
scale reporting system. FY 1979 will be a transition
year. Headquarters and the Regions will submit short
reports quantifying their accomplishments and their
plans, relating them to the projected program accom-
plishments they used to justify decision unit levels
in the FY lb>79 ZBB submission. The Regions will provide
standardized, quantifiable data but at a level reduced
from that in FY 1976. A Regional/Headquarters work
group has begun work to define specific levels of
reporting and the measures the Regions will use.
State reporting requirements will not change. For
FY 1980 and beyond, Headquarters and the Regions
will develop reporting requirements in coordination
with the Guidance/ZBB/Gperating Plan process.
In conjunction with changes to our information/
accountability systems, in Fi 1980 we will also work
toward completing the integration of our computer-based
data systems in the financial and resources management
area.
-------
- 447 -
Implementing the Integrated Environmental Assistance
Act — Headquarters and Regional Offices must prepare
to implement the proposed "Integrated Environmental
Assistance Act of 1979." This Act will strengthen
our State/EPA agreement effort and encourage meaningful
integration of our State and local assistance program
grants. We will develop a detailed implementation plan
during FY 1979 and I960. Regional Office staffs will
be asked to participate substantially in the work
groups assigned to these tasks. The program offices,
working with 0PM, must develop a process for integrating
national program guidance which will be utilized by
Regions in negotiating integrated program plans under
the Act.
Regional Administrators should carefully review
current grant operations to identify those changes
which will be necessary to implement the Integrated
Environmental Assistance Act. Regions should build
on the Regional Grants Management Task Force report
to ensure Regional grant organization and functions
are shaped in a way best suited to accommodate and
achieve integration of our State and local assistance
programs. Regional Administrators should accord
similar high priority to the Administrator's commit-
ment to having State/EPA agreements in place for
all programs by end of FY 1980.
Strengthening Budget Execution — The fifth
area of critical importance to Resources Management
is budget execution. The top budget execution priority
for Headquarters and the Regions is strengthening
it by improving the requirements for justification
of changes, coordinating offices which are affected
by the changes, and integrating financial data with
the program accountability data.
In addition, ORN will upgrade the object class
analysis, build it into budget development, and develop
the capacity to display all budget figures according
to authorizing category. Throughout the process
we will strive to continue to improve our working
relationships with the various Congressional committees,
the Regions, and other Headquarters offices. Mid-year
and quarterly reviews should be stressed as highly
useful management tools.
-------
- 448 -
In addition to the five areas of highest priority,
there are a number of other priorities in Resources
Management:
o Analyzing the resource implications of State/
local delegations.
o Analyzing cross-cutting issues. We must
continue to examine the resource implications.
o Auditing resource use. The quality of our
decisions on pricing and resource allocation
depends as much on the accuracy of the
Agency's accounting of how it is presently
using resources as on the relative priority
of activities.
o Initiating operating efficiencies in financial
management. Because financial management throughout
the Agency is largely tied down by day-to-day
operational workloads, we must find new ways—through
automation, better use of personnel resources,
and greater involvement of program offices—to
reduce paperwork. Financial managers must find
ways to divert more of their resources to support
the larger analytical efforts in both Regional
and Headquarters offices. Our financial resources
can be better used in cash management, financial
analysis, cost benefit and productivity analysis,
and financial information assistance to program
managers and grantees.
o Improving financial systems support for both
analytical and accountability purposes. Vve
will improve the integration of financial and
accounting systems to link planning, budget
control, resource utilization, and performance
review during both FY I960 and BY 1981.
o Undertaking a major effort to involve both
programs and Regional management offices in
the development of obligation and outlay
plans and projections, particularly in
construction grants.
Region-Specific Guidance — In summary, the
highest priorities for the Regions' traditional resource
management activities will be as follows:
-------
- 449 -
o improving development of the operating
plan;
o implementing the Full Time Equivalent
requirement;
o participating in the Regional workload
analysis;
o improving budget execution capacity and the
Regions' abilities to justify changes in their
plans;
o implementing a Regional and State account-
ability system with reporting requirements
and interfaces to financial information;
o participating in the revision of Headquarters
workload and pricing analysis;
o implementing the Integrated Environmental
Assistance Act;
o participating in an Agencywide review of
grant procedures;
o cooperating with Headquarters in efforts
to upgrade the management of construction
grant outlays;
o selectively participating in analyses of the
following budget issues:
- grants/delegation
- cross-cutting issues
- Agency Ranking Committee issues
- media issues;
o improving operating efficiencies in
financial management.
Planning, Evaluation and Analysis
The primary objective of Planning, Evaluation,
and Analysis is to provide strong, independent analytic
-------
- 450 -
and evaluative support to the Agency top management,
enabling them to manage the Agency's programs and
make decisions which will maximize progress towards
the Agency's environmental objectives. The highest
priorities for FY 1980/81 will be —
o improving the planning/guidance process
so that it is a more useful management
tool;
o helping the Agency implement regulatory
reforms which improve the effectiveness and
reduce unnecessary costs of EPA's programs;
o strengthening the Regional Administrators'
management/analytic capacity;
o helping improve program effectiveness through
performance-based evaluations;
o supporting the analytic and project manage-
ment needs of the Administrator and Deputy
Administrator;
o helping program offices improve the quality
of regulations developed by EPA;
o providing leadership for Agency analytical
work in economic, energy, and statistical
analysis to improve Agency decisions, defend
the Agency's program, and protect environmental
interests involved in other agencies' actions.
Headquarters Specific Guidance — The key
elements for the Office of Planning and Evaluation at
Headquarters for FY 1980/81 are as follows:
o Manage and improve the process for develop-
ment of practical, defensible regulations
consistent with Administration policy and
legal requirements:
- improve working group effectiveness;
- increase Regional involvement in regulation
development;
-------
- 451 -
- provide more timely information to top
management on status of and issues in
regulations under development;
- increase public awareness of and parti-
cipation in regulation development;
- strengthen the linkages between regulation
development and the budget to help ensure
that the resource implications of new
regulations are adequately addressed.
o Improve analytic tools to assist top
management regulatory decisions (the
demonstration of the benefits of environ-
mental regulation will be of the highest
priority):
- demonstrate the use of benefits
assessment in standard-setting through
several pilot tests each year;
- show how risk assessment and exposure
data can be incorporated in the setting
of regulatory priorities and standards;
- use marginal cost information to regulate
more efficiently and provide useful
perspectives in the absence of information
on benefits.
o Review (and assist in developing and improving)
proposed regulatory and legislative action
from a policy standpoint, focusing on technical
feasibility, economic impact, energy impact,
statistical validity, justification, implement-
ability, impact on other programs, consistency
with Agency goals, strategy and policies.
o Provide project management or consulting
services on high priority, policy-oriented
analyses at the request of the Administrator
or Deputy Administrator. Respond to requests
quickly and effectively with analysis,
diagnosis, recommendations and implementation
of change. Train staff to develop project
management skills.
-------
- 452 -
o Manage (in conjunction with the Office of
Resources Management) the planning process
and make it a more useful management tool:
- increase direct role of top management
in priority-setting and planning;
- reduce paperwork involved in the guidance;
- tie guidance to evaluation of performance
against plans;
- improve scheduling to allow for timely
review and comment by tne State and local
governments and the Regional offices.
o Coordinate implementation of the regulatory
reform program, including improvements in both
regulation and budget development and approaches
to specific environmental problems:
- coordinate Agency efforts to test,
evaluate, and implement better environ-
mental protection at the same or lesser
cost;
- serve as a catalyst for development of
more reform proposals;
- give highest priority emphasis to
controlled trading initiatives (e.g.,
marketable permits, offsets, banking) to
examine whether more broadly applicable
approaches would be desirable.
o Improve program effectiveness through
performance-based evaluations:
- conduct 3 to 5 major evaluations each fiscal
year, with special emphasis on Federal/
State/local roles during FY 1980/81;
- develop guidelines for self-evaluation
by programs and Regions?
- move Regional profiles from the pilot
stage to routine use as a tool for
assessing and improving performance,
if warranted. *
-------
- 453 -
o Help the Regions build their analytic
capability to support Regional Administrator
decision makings
- help recruit staff and introduce them
to available sources of assistance;
- help develop analytic agendas for
the Regional Management/Analytic Centers;
- work cooperatively on selected projects.
Region-_Sp_ecific Guidance -- Because most, of
the environmental management resources are located in
State and local governments, and because environmental
program management is rapidly becoming more complex
and interrelated, it is essential that the Regional
Administrators improve their staffs' capabilities
in the areas of planning, evaluation, and analysis.
In FY 1980 at least three regions will have Regional
Management/Analytic Centers serving as pilot studies
of how project-oriented analytic groups can assist
the Regional Administrators in managing and solving
environmental problems. If the pilot Centers are
successful, Centers should be added for most, if
not ell the Regions in FY 1981.
Tne h i gj) e s t g• r jL o r it i_ea for the Regions' traditional
planning, evaluation, and analysis activities will
be —
o coordinating Regional input to the Agency's
guidance, budget, and operating plans;
o providing the Regional Administrators with
progiam evaluations which assess Regional
performance in solving environmental problems
and advise how to improve it;
o performing economic analysis for Regional
management;
o ensuring productive Regional involvement
in regulation development.
Fey Regional activities for both years will include
the following:
-------
- 454 -
o working with Headquarters and Regional
program staff on all aspects of the guidance
and budget development;
o developing Regional operating plans;
o evaluating Regional performance in solving
environmental problems (perhaps with
Regional profiles as inputs) and recommending
changes in policy, organization, resource
allocation, or management approaches to
improve performance;
o performing economic and financial analysis
required for all significant reaulatory
actions, EIS's, and noncompliance penalty
calculations;
o advising the Regional Administrator of
economic impacts of individual and aggregate
Regional actions (e.g., plant closings from
enforcement actions; combined impacts on
economically vulnerable industries);
o managing the Early Earning System
responsibilities, including new efforts
to avoid specific economic dislocations
by making SBA/EDA/DOL assistance proqrams
work better;
o reviewing economic and population growth
projections;
o analyzing energy-related Regional issue?
and participating in the EPA Energy Policy
Committee through Region VIII representation;
o ensuring full participation by the Regions
in Headquarters regulation development;
o hiring and developing analytic staff.
Most Regions will have to markedly upgrade
their capabilities for program evaluation and
economic analysis, and both headauarters and the
Regions will have to improve efforts to work together
on regulation development.
-------
- 455 -
Those Regions with Management/Analytic Centers
will have these additional activities:
o recruiting staff (FY 79/80);
o developing work plans cooperatively with 0PM
and other Regions, including projects that:
- enable RA's to manage integrated State
environmental programs;
- undertake demonstrations of new processes
and reforms (e.g., consolidated permitting);
- demonstrate analysis, solution design, and
implementation for complex problems affecting
several Regions (e.g., urban transportation-
related nonattainment problems);
- develop strategies for dealing with problem
industries and Regions (e.g., steel in
Region V).
o initiating projects to assist RA's in
management of high priority, complex issues.
Agency Support Services
Priorities for Agency Support in FY 1980/81
will include:
0 Facilities Management
- Continuing the program to identify anu
correct health, safety, and environmental
deficiencies in EPA facilities in both
Headquarters and the Regions;
- Seeking increased EPA autonomy in space
management;
- Upgrading agency space planning capabilities
to prevent the traditional "lag" between
increased personnel and increased space.
o Automatic Data Processing
- Continuing, as the highest priority, to
provide the basic computer service now
-------
- 456 -
represented by the Washington Computer and
National Computer Centers;
- Moving the Agency from its current posture
of widely separate and sometimes duplicative
and unsatisfactory data systems to an environ-
ment where systems dealing with similar Agency
programs, sets of data, or regulated industries
can be integrated;
- Completing the first two of four steps in
the procurement of a data center(s) to replace
the current system in the 1984-94 time period
(OMB A-109 process — RFP release in FY 1980,
contract initiation in FY 1981);
- Improving the quality of the Agency's data flow
from sources to the Regions and Headquarters,
using minicomputers where appropriate.
Regional offices will be affected by changes in
central data center support and should participate in
acquisition strategy, evaluation and review panels.
Regions will face some workload increases during
conversion between interim data centers. Program
integration efforts should provide significant
benefits to the Regions. As a result, Regional
offices may wish to examine their own internal ADP
support activities to determine how best to take
advantage of the integration and new data which
will become more readily available.
o Libraries
EPA libraries in both Regions and Headquarters
exist to ensure the availability of information
in meeting the Agency's goals. Priority activities
will include:
- Providing specialized information to satisfy
the Agency's peculiar needs, especially
when the information is not readily available
elsewhere;
- Providing assistance to EPA staff, State
and local government staff and the general
public in locating and utilizing information
necessary to support EPA's goals.
-------
- 457 -
o Management and Organization Analysis
- Developing increased capacity to meet the
growing demand from program offices for
assistance in developing and implementing
the processes and organizational structures
required for effective inter-and intra-media
integration of program policy.
Occupational Health and Safety
The priority objective is to continue leadership
of an effective, decentralized occupational health
and safety program by assisting Regions in program and
resource development and through technical support. The
principal elements of this objective are as follows:
o Expanding health and safety training, emphasizing
skill development of collateral duty personnel;
o Developing and promoting mandatory training
programs for supervisors, employee representatives,
and safety committee members;
o Providing program audit and consultant services,
as a high priority item, to ensure effective
and timely response to needs;
o Ensuring participation by Regions in regulation
and guidance development activities;
o Reviewing OSHA policies, standards, and procedures
and advising Regions of potential impact and
compliance needs;
o Expanding capability to accommodate OSHA require-
ments by using an automated management information
system.
Regional priorities will be planning, implementa-
tion, and evaluation of the health and safety program.
The Office of Research and Development, Regional
Offices, and national program offices should budget
for periodic physicals for designated employees.
Legal Services
Assuming that in FY 1980 and 1981 there will be
no major changes in our statutes, that regulatory
-------
- 458 -
activities under our current statutes will continue
to increase as implementing rules are issued and
new permit programs begin, that most of the significant
regulatory activities will be challenged in court,
and that government regulation itself will continue
to be a major public policy issue, the following
are the priorities for Legal Services:
° Litigation — Defensive litigation is not
an activity we can choose to conduct. Once
sued, we must at least do what the courts
regard as an adequate job. Otherwise, we
risk both our reputation with the courts
and disruption to Agency programs from avoid-
able defeats. Therefore, litigation must
be our first legal service priority.
o Advising on Regulatory Actions — Early legal
advice on regulations will make them better
and easier to defend. Ideally, OGC should
be drafting at least portions of the preamble
for major regulations. However, because
other offices in the Agency can pick up some
of the slack we might leave in this area
(which is not true for litigation), legal
review drafting of regulations is second
priority.
o Regulatory Reform — EPA is under tremendous
pressure to justify itself in terms of "regulatory
reform," and the Administrator has made this
a top priority. Searching for innovations,
however, must be secondary to ensuring that
the actions which the Agency is going to
take anyway are legally defensible and -.re
defended. For that reason, and although
it remains a priority activity, regulatory
reform is third priority when scarce resources
are being distributed.
Headquarters Staff Offices
EPA's Staff Offices perform a number of
essential functions as well as a central integrating
role. A study is now under way to evaluate the
functions and present structure of the Staff
Offices. The study may result in changes during
-------
- 459 -
FY 1979. For purposes of this Guidance, assume
that the present functions performed by the Staff
Offices will continue in FY 1980 and 1981. Discussion
of alternatives for these offices will be reserved
until completion of the study.
The activities covered by this portion of
the Guidance are carried out by the following
offices:
o Civil Rights
o Inspector General
o Legislation
o Public Awareness
o Federal Activities
o Regional and Intergovernmental Operations
o International Activities
o Immediate Office (Administrator-Deputy)
- Administrative Law Judge
- Science Advisory Board
- Land Use Coordination
Because of the close relationship between
these offices and the Administrator and Deputy,
many of the activities of these offices are
flexible and are readily adjusted to meet
changing priorities.
In addition to the priorities set out explicitly
in the following paragraphs, we will continue
to give high priority attention to urban policy
efforts. The Immediate Office of the Administrator/
Deputy Administrator will continue to provide
leadership for the Urban Work Group. The Regional
and program offices should continue to provide
staff support and initiatives. Program offices
should continue to identify regulations and legis-
lative and budget initiatives with potentially
-------
- 460 -
signficant urban impacts and to conduct urban
and community impact analyses on those initiatives,
preferably as an integral part of other required
impact analyses.
Office of Civil Rights — The Office of
Civil Rights (OCR) oversees the implementation
of affirmative action plans and will work closely
with Personnel Management Division on programs
to increase the number of women and minorities
in under-represented occupational groups. OCR
investigates and oversees processing discrimination
complaints in Headquarters, Regional offices,
and laboratories and has assumed jurisdiction over
all processing in five Regional Offices. OCR
manages programs designed to assist small,
disadvantaged, and minority-owned businesses
in providing indirect procurement services to
EPA; directs, monitors, and reviews implementation
of Minority Business Enterprise policy under
the construction grant-in-aid program; monitors
other nondiscrimination compliance programs
involving Agency assistance; and provides
liaison with external civil rights groups.
In FY 1981, responsibility for processing
discrimination complaints should be shifted back
to the five Regional Offices for which OCR assumed
jurisdiction. Initial implementation of the
new MBE program will be resource intensive; an
increase of 0.7 FTE workyears in FY 1980 at
Headquarters will enable this office to provide
the support and oversight required to implement
this Presidential initiative.
Inspector General — The Office of the
Inspector General, which will be created in
FY 1979 by combining the Office of Audit with the
investigations resources of the Security and
Inspection Division, will be undergoing a complete
evaluation of its functions and resources in
FY 1979 and 1980. It will be responsible for
implementing, for EPA, the Inspector General
Act of 1978, P.L. 95-452.
The Office will undergo a thorough evaluation
of its goals and priorities after the Inspector ^
-------
- 461 -
General is appointed. The priority emphasis will
continue to be the Construction Grants program.
'we will complete the initial implementation of
changes to the Audit Management System (Audit
Resolution Board and computer tracking of audit
findings) in late FY 1979 and early 1960. The
Office of Audit should continue its successful
emphasis on the use of contract auditors to
supplement the EPA Audit personnel.
Office of Legislation — The Agency will
continue to need a central capacity through which
to initiate and coordinate communications and
interaction with Congress. The functions provided
include daily liaison with key Congressional
members, committees, and staff to gather information,
convey and advocate agency positions, and brief
members on items of interest; preparation of
testimony and briefing materials for Congressional
hearings; development and negotiation of legisla-
tive changes; review and comment on introduced
legislation; and direct services such as response
to personal and telephoned Congressional inquiries
and Congressional mail and notification of grant
awards. In addition OL distributes Congressional
documents, provides summaries of pertinent
Congressional Record and Federal Register entries,
and compileshearings schedulesand reports for
use throughout the Agency.
Legislative priorities include passage of the
Integrated Environmental Assistance Act, legislation
to establish a comprehensive Hazardous Waste
Emergency and Liability Fund, and reauthorization
of all existing programs, including the Clean Water
Act. OL expects Congressional oversight of the
Clean Air Act following the Report of the Air Quality
Commission and revision of the SIPs. Continued
strong Congressional interest in the effects of
EPA regulations on inflation and as a constraint
on energy development will necessitate an increase
in office liaison activities, preparation of
hearings, and efforts to head off undesirable
legislation. Case work and liaison with Regional
Administrators and their Congressional and out-
reach staffs will have to expand to deal with
concerns of members of Congress and their con-
stituents as the State-EPA Agreements are effected
-------
- 462 -
and new programs are implemented pursuant to the
recent revisions to the CAA, CWA, and FIFRA.
Office of Public Awareness — The Immediate
Office of the Administrator and the Office of
Public Awareness are jointly developing an Agency-wide
public participation policy during FY 1979 and
are providing guidance to the programs and Regions
for the development of their public participation
plans and priorities. They will also provide
direction for implementation training, development
of evaluation criteria and incentives to strengthen
public participation in all programs.
The Office of Public Awareness priorities,
in order of importance are to --
o Develop public information materials
in support of EPA program operations.
Public information/participation plans,
with their elements prioritized, are
prepared by OPA in coordination with
the programs and are revised annually.
o Perform outreach activities to increase
constituent understanding of the EPA
mission and programs, and EPA apprecia-
tion for the concerns of its diverse
constituencies.
o Promote public awareness of EPA activities
through electronic and print media.
o Provide resources to, and serve as coordinator
between OPA headquarters, OPA Regional staffs
and State Public Information Officers in support
of program information and participation
activities.
Greater commitment to these goals by program
offices will be required in FY 1980/81 to offset
the FY 1980 reduction in central resources.
Office of Federal Activities — The Office of
Federal Activities has four major goals and priorities
(in rank order):
-------
- 463 -
o Oversee the development (including relevant
research) and presentation (including
negotiations with the senior officials in
other agencies) of the EPA position on all
proposed major Federal actions likely to
have significant impacts on the human
environment.
o Provide information, and recommendations to
the Administrator and Deputy Administrator
through staff papers and briefings concerning —
- EPA's compliance with NLPA (including
development of appropriate guidance
documents and regulations) and related
statutes, executive orders, and policy
statements (e.g., wetlands, endangered
species and prime farmlands);
- the environmental impact of the programs
and activities of other Federal agencies.
o As National Program Manager, exercise quality
control over and develop programs to improve the
performance of the EIS Review and EIS Preparation
Programs and staff in EPA's program and Regional
offices.
o Participate on EPA working groups and interagency
task forces on matters relating to OFA management
programs.
Office of Regional and Intergovernmental Operations —
The office provides a Headquarters secretariat for the
Regions and coordinates and assures Regional participation
and representation in the Agency's policy and regulation
development and evaluation processes. The office also
serves as Agency liaison with national organizations
representing general purpose State and local governments
such as the National Governors' Association and the U.S.
Conference of Mayors. The ORIO staff maintains
continuing contact with these organizations to ensure
their understanding of, gain their support for, and
provide interpretation of their views on EPA objectives
and policies. ORIO is expected to concentrate on these
objectives:
o Strengthening the communications linking the
Administrator, Deputy Administrator, staff and
-------
- 464 -
program offices with EPA's ten Regional
Administrators and their staffs;
o Continuing to assist in improving the effective-
ness of the participation and representation of
the .Regional Administrators in EPA's policy
and management processes;
o Supporting the Administrator's/Deputy Adminis-
trator's efforts to strengthen the Federal/State/
local partnership with particular emphasis
on State/EPA agreement activities in the
Regional Offices and passage and implemen-
tation of an Integrated Environmental
Assistance Act.
Office of International Activities — The Agency
has these specific international objectives for
1980-81 (in priority order):
o Provide leadership, especially to the
industrialized countries, in establishing
effective environmental control of toxic
substances and hazardous and radioactive
waste and work toward harmonization
of regulatory actions in these and other
environmental areas;
o Extend our efforts with Canada and Mexico
to solve the most pressing pollution
problems threatening both sides of the
borders;
o Expand and improve the exchange of
state-of-the-art technology with German^,
Japan, and other countries most advanced
in environmental protection;
o Enlarge and improve EPA's cooperation with
developing countries to enable them to
address their environmental problems more
effectively, working directly with a few
selected foreign countries and through the UN;
o Continue to support productive programs
with the USSR, NATO's Committee on the
Challenges of Modern Society, and various
-------
- 465 -
Countries through the Scientific Activities
Overseas program;
o Develop environmental cooperation with
the People's Republic of China;
o Continue to press for adequate
environmental standards in all marine
negotiations, including Law of the
Sea, the Ocean Dumping Convention and
the Intergovernmental Maritime
Consultative Organization;
o Continue to coordinate the Agency's
participation in the environmental aspects
of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Act.
The Office of International Activities coordi-
nates the achievement of these Agency objectives and
represents the Agency in a variety of international
forums. A reduction in resources in FY 1980 will put
a larger burden of coordination on the program
offices and will decrease the amount of support
available in international efforts.
Immediate Office of the Administrator and
Deputy — In addition to personal staff assistance,
the immediate office contains the offices of
the Science Advisor and the Administrative Law
Judge. Increased resources in the Science Advisor's
Office will make possible better coordination and
preparation of information for the Administrator's
regulatory decisions. The mission of the Office
of Land Use Coordination is to ensure that the Agency's
programs contribute to planning integration and sound
land use planning. In particular, the office will
work to ensure that adverse effects of growth and
land use in urban areas and environmentally sensitive
areas are minimized through program assistance and by
continuing to help provide staff support to the
EPA Urban "Work Group.
The Administrative Law Judges should expect an
increased workload as a result of the civil penalties
requirements under the Toxic Substances Control
Act, Section 120 of the Clean Air Act and the Solid
Waste Disposal Act. In addition, amendment of the
-------
- 466 -
FIFRA rules of practice will require cases to go
to the ALJ at an earlier stage, resulting in additional
cases. An increase in resources for FY 1980/61 ir.ay
be necessary to handle these increased requirements.
Regional Policy Direction
This Decision Unit brings together the key *•
elements in the Regional office which enable the
exercise of internal leadership to achieve program
unity and more effective use of resources, and the
exercise of external leadership to achieve a fuller
understanding of the Agency's goals and purposes and
a fuller degree of Federal-State-local cooperation.
Specifically, energies will need to be focused
on:
o Providing integrative leadership and cross-
media insight and understanding of Regional
and national programs.
o Working with State and local officials to ™
achieve more effective, coordinated and
integrated efforts to solve environmental
problems and decrease or eliminate environmental
pollution. Implementing effective State/EPA
agreements.
o Maintaining contact with local Congressional
staffs to be responsive to their concerns
and to achieve a fuller understanding of
the Agency's goals.
o Providing information to the press and other
media implementing programs to assist the
public to better understand the purposes
and goals of the EPA, and ensuring that
public concerns are identified and under-
stood with the Regional Offices.
o Improving public participation in Agency
decision-making.
o Emphasizing EEC programs to ensure more
effective participation.
o Refining and upgrading analytical capacity 4
to achieve more effective participation in
-------
- 467 -
ZBB, regulatory development and reform and
other management strengthening processes.
o Identifying and implementing changes needed
to achieve more effective use of resources.
o Ensuring implementation of the Civil Service
Reform Act.
o Ensuring implementation of the Integrated
Environmental Assistance Act upon its
passage .
Program Management
The primary objective of program management
is to provide management and support to the
programs, to enable them to better accomplish their
objectives. The program management element of each
Assistant Administrator's office plays a key role
in the integration of Agency programs, Regional
coordination, and the accomplishment of key planning,
budgeting and other management processes. It is
essential that these offices develop and maintain
a strong capacity to fulfill these roles.
The main priorities for the Office of Toxic
Substances during B* 1980 and FY 19bl are to:
o Achieve institutional maturation with
a stable organization and technically
and managerially Qualified staff;
o Operate a detailed planning and evaluation
system for toxic substances and pesticide
programs ;
o Develop, in cooperation with the R&D
community, a high priority research program;
o Examine the need for major legislative
changes to the Toxic Substances Control
Act in 1981, and develop and support
such changes, if appropriate.
In addition to its continuing management role,
the Office of Enforcement will give priority
attention to the following activities:
-------
- 468 -
o Coordinating the Office of Enforcement's
compliance efforts with respect to Federal ';
facilities, including the development of
policies, guidance, and procedures to ensure
full compliance; A
o Reviewing EPA litigation prior to transmittal
to the Department of Justice;
o Expanding the coordination and planning role
to include implementation of a multi-media
docket and status-tracking system, legal
strategy development and development of a
national training program tor legal/
enforcement personnel;
o Developing multi-media industry enforcement
strategies for various industries;
o Reviewing methods, strategies and techniques *
and Federal/State/local roles in ensuring
continuous compliance;
o Improving and extending cooperative enforcement
with other Federal agencies;
o Developing, in cooperation with the Regions,
effective workload models for distributing
resources in both Regions and Headquarters.
The highest priorities tor the Office of Air, Noise
and Radiation will be:
o Strengthening capability to coordinate
Headquarters and Regional planning;
o Extending program capacity to manage the
implementation of new personnel requirements.
The major priorities for the Office of Planning and
Management will be:
o Developing and implementing a variety of
management reforms to enable both the
Office of Planning and Management and 4
the Agency to do a better job; ™
-------
- 469 -
Significantly improving cooperative
relationships with the Regions, especially
with the Management Divisions;
Developing, in cooperation with the Regions,
a good set of management media workload models
for resource allocation purposes;
Implementing centralized budgeting and
management information and tracking systems
within the Office of Planning and Management;
Completing the staffing of the office with
m
-------
- 470 -
for the scope of GWWM responsibilities. The staff
generates new policy initiatives and program
implementation strategies. It performs a coor-
dinating and synthesizing role among OWWM's several
programs and between OWVv'M, the other program offices
of the Agency and with the Regions. Major areas
of staff concentration in OWWM are:
-------
- 469 -,
o Significantly improving cooperative
relationships with the Regions, especially
with the Management Divisions;
o Developing, in cooperation with the Regions,
a good set of management media workload models
for resource allocation purposes;
o Implementing centralized budgeting and
management information and tracking systems
within the Office of Planning and Management;
o Completing the staffing of the office with
highly competent, qualified people capable
of undertaking a wide variety of management
tasks.
Beyond its continuing responsibilities for
managing the program, the main focus for the Office
of Research and Development will be:
o Expanding the research committee system
to encompass nearly all of the R&D
program;
o Improving the responsiveness of the
Research Program to the needs of the
Enforcement Program and the Regions;
o Refining the system used to award and
monitor grants and cooperative agreements;
o Improving the ability of management to
handle new programs and changes in
organizational structure;
o Strengthening the management, collection
and dissemination of technical information
and scientific data.
The Assistant Administrator's Office for Water and
Waste Management will continue to strengthen its
capabilities to provide staff support to the Assistant
Administrator in his day-to-day responsibilities to
implement and administer the water and waste manage-
ment statutes. Additionally, the staff performs a
function of program analysis planning and development
-------
- 470 -
for the scope of OWWM responsibilities. The staff
generates new policy initiatives and program
implementation strategies. It performs a coor-
dinating and synthesizing role among OWWM's several
programs and between OWWM, the other program offices
of the Agency and with the Regions. Major areas
of staff concentration in OWWM are:
o Program planning, budget and financial
management;
o Coordination and review of standards and
regulation development;
o Review and t'espond to Agency management
initiatives} and
o Policy an-d strategy development an^
assessment.
------- |