-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
FORM!: DECISION UNIT OVERVIEW
A) DECISION UNIT TITLE (AND CODE) HQ OE MEDIA:Toxic
Substances
TOXIC SUBSTANCES ENFORCEMENT (L305) **$• APPROEnforcement
B) LONG RANGE GOALS & MAJOR OBJECTIVES The fundamental goal of the Toxic Sub-
stances Enforcement Program is to procect the public health and the environment
from risks posed by chemical substances through enforcement of the Toxic Sub-
stances Control Act of 1976 (TSCA) and regulations promulgated thereunder.
Specific program objectives in support of this goal include development and
implementation of inspectional and compliance monitoring programs to ensure
compliance with TSCA; development and utilization of appropriate remedies for
the enforcement of TSCA; support for Regional case preparations and prosecution
initiated under authority of TSCA; and assistance to the Office of Toxic Sub-
stances in the development of regulations promulgated under TSCA.
Cl FY 78 ACCOMPLISHMENTS Ma3or ^~^8 accomplishments of the Toxic Substances
Enforcement Program' include: delegation of TSCA inspection and enforcement
authority to the Regional level; development of rules of practice governing
enforcement and compliance related hearings initiated under TSCA; development
of interim TSCA penalty policy; completion of a feasibility study regarding
TSCA enforcement automated data processing needs; identification of Regional/
HQ personnel/procedures to be used in coordinating response to toxic substance
emergencies; development of enforcement strategy, compliance monitoring policy,
and inspection procedures for the PCB Marking and Disposal Regulation and TSCA
§8(b) Inventory; development of draft enforcement strategy for PCB Ban and
Chlorofluorocarbon.Regulations; development of initial chemical import proce-
dures .
D) FY 79 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION Major py-79 activities of the Toxic Substances
Enforcement Program include: development of final TSCA penalty policy; comple-
tion of PCB Ban and Chlorofluorocarbon enforcement strategy, compliance monitor
ing policy, and inspection proceduresJ development of final chemical import
procedures; support for Regional case preparations/prosecutions initiated under
authority of TSCA; assistance to the Office of Toxic Substances in the develop-
ment of new regulations promulgated under TSCA; identification of regulatory
audience affected, development of enforcement strategies, compliance monitoring
policies, inspections procedures, and Regional implementation guidance for all
new regulations developed under TSCA; establishment of cooperative enforcement
agreements with selected States.
cms
EFA Form 2410-10 (8-76)
-------
l.TAL PffOTPCTION AGENCY
2? DECISION UNIT LEVEL ANALYSIS
A. DECISION UNIT TITLE AND CODE HQ MEUIAj TOX SUB
L305 TOXIC SUBSTANCES ENFORCEMENT APPPDj ENFORCEMENT
B, RESOURCE SUMMARY FY 78 ACT FY 79 C. E. FY BO INCR FY 80
POSITIONS PFT 23.0 31.0 ?3,0 23.0
LEVEL OPFT a.O 5.0 5.0
01 OF no FTE 36.7 34. 1 3fl.l
BUDGET HJTH. (000,0) olb.O 2,196.9 1*353, b 1*353,6
C. DESCRIBE THE INCREMENTAL ACTIVITIES OF THIS LEVEL ONLY. DESCRIBE THE BENEFITS
ACTI^
OF FUNDING AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FUNDING.
IVITIES
Coordinate response and provide direct assistance to Regional investigation
and litigation of toxic substance emergencies which threaten public health
(Section 7, 8(e), and multi-media emergencies).
— Receive information; trigger National Contingency Plan; as appropriate
alert -Agency management
— Coordinate technical/legal support
— Assess situation; develop appropriate enforcement response
— Coordinate Headquarters/Regional response
Provide technical support to the Regions for enforcement actions arising
out of multi-media or toxic substance emergencies which threaten public
health (Section 7, 8(e), and multi-media emergencies). (NEIC).
— Provide technical support to Regions in the assessment of multi-media
or toxic substance incidents through computer-based data systems
regarding chemical toxicity, geographic distribution of chemical
production, epidemiological effects, etc.
— Collect and analyze enforcement samples in support of large-scale
investigations
— Provide technical advice and expert testimony.in support of large-
scale enforcement prosecutions
Manage and execute national program to implement and enforce three 86 (Chemi-
cal Control) regulations: PCB Marking and Disposal, PCB Ban, and CFC Ban
regulations.
— Provide legal/technical interpretation regarding application of each
rule
— Establish national/situation specific enforcement policy
— Establish national compliance monitoring priorities
— Participate, as appropriate, in such implementation activities as site
approval process (PCB Marking and Disposal); exemption process (PCB
Ban)
j- — Coordinate Chemical Control Enforcement Program within EPA, with other
federal agencies, and with state and local governments.
Manage and execute national program to implement and enforce the require-
ments of Section 13 (Import) and Section 12 (Export) with regard to
chemicals regulated under Sections 5, 6, or 7.
— Maintain liaison with Customs Bureau and other appropriate EPA offices
to assure effective implementation of import policy
— Provide, as appropriate, legal/technical interpretation regarding appli-
cation of each rule
~r-?Stablish and communicate to field-level Customs officials, national
C Compliance monitoring and enforcement priorities
EPA Form 2410-11 (8-78)
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
FORM 2: DECISION UNIT LEVEL ANALYSIS
A. DECISION UNIT TITLE {AND CODE)
TOXIC SUBSTANCES ENFORCEMENT (L305)
HQ
REG.
OE
MEDIA:Toxic
Substances
APPRO:
Enforcemeni
B. RESOURCE SUMMARY
FY 78 ACTUAL FY 79 C. EST. FY 80 INCR.
FY80CUM.
LEVEL
-L-OF-&-
POSITIONS PFT
OPFT
FTE
BUDGET AUTH. (000.0)
C. DESCRIBE THE INCREMENTAL ACTIVITIES OF THIS LEVEL ONLY. DESCRIBE THE BENEFITS
OF FUNDING AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FUNDING.
— Assess international inspection strategies and procedures; identify
international impacts of domestic enforcement policy
o Manage and execute national program to implement and enforce seven Section
4 (Testing) regulations.
— Establish national compliance monitoring and enforcement priorities
— Establish national/situation specific enforcement policy
— Provide legal/technical interpretation of application of each testing
rule
— Maintain liaison with FDA for the coordination of the administrative
and quality assurance aspects of each investigation
o Provide substantive enforcement input into TSCA regulation development
activities: 11 Section 6 (Chemical Control), 8 Section 4 (Testing), and
2 Section 8 (Chemical Information) regulations.
— Assure enforceability of regulations
— Identify enforcement issues; raise issues to management
— Identify affected audience
— Develop national enforcement strategies
— Develop national inspection manual procedures
o Perform national analysis of records and reports submitted pursuant to PCB,
CFC, and Section 8 (Chemical Information) requirements, and review the
operation of the national enforcement program.
— Cross check records/reports to detect violations
— Readjust compliance monitoring priorities
— Review Headquarters files of Regional compliance monitoring and enforce'
ment activities
— Adjust national enforcement priorities to reflect major changes in
compliance assumptions
o Provide support to Regional case preparation/prosecution activities for
^ 40 Section 6 (Chemical Control), 1 Section 4 (Testing) and 1 Section 8(a)
(Chemical Information) case, and for 10 cases arising out of multi-media
or toxic substance emergencies.
— Advise the Regions regarding assessment of report, records, or results
of sample analysis
— Confer with the Regions regarding the selection of appropriate remedy,
application of enforcement criteria, and litigation strategy
— Advise and assist Regions in preparing documents and other materials
for the prosecution of the case, arranging for expert witnesses, pre-
paring witnesses for testimony, conducting public hearing
0151
EPA Form 2410-11 (8-78)
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
FORM 2: DECISION UNIT LEVEL ANALYSIS
A. DECISION UNIT TITLE (AND CODE)
TOXIC SUBSTANCES ENFORCEMENT (L305)
HQ OE
REG.
MEDIA:Toxic
B. RESOURCE SUMMARY
FY 78 ACTUAL FY 79 C. EST. FY80INCR.
FY 80 CUM.
LEVEL
— L—OF--6—
POSITIONS PFT
OPFT
FTEj
BUDGET AUTH. (000.0!
C. DESCRIBE THE INCREMENTAL ACTIVITIES OF THIS LEVEL ONLY. DESCRIBE THE BENEFITS
OF FUNDING AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FUNDING.
— Advise and assist Regions in preparing briefs on all prehearing, post-
hearing motions or proposed orders
— Develop enforcement policy, appellate strategy and prepare all briefs
and other documents as necessary to pursue any appeal of an initial
decision of the Regional Administrator
o Participate directly in the case preparation/prosecution of 2 criminal
cases, and in the appellate review of 3 civil enforcement actions.
— Participate with FBI, Regions on investigation team for development
of evidence, and case preparation of criminal cases
— Participate with DOJ, OGC on litigation team in development of litiga-
- tion strategy and prosecution of criminal cases, and appeal of civil
enforcement actions
— Maintain close liaison with DOJ to expedite subpoenas, warrants, dis-
covery, case preparation/prosecutions of criminal cases, and appeals
of civil enforcement actions
o Respond to suits filed pursuant to Section 20 (Citizens' Civil Actions)
designed to compel the Administrator to perform nondiscretionary function.
— Establish litigation strategy for suits filed against: third parties to
compel compliance with TSCA
— Determine appropriate enforcement policy in suits filed against the
Administrator to compel a nondiscretionary action
— Take all actions to prepare pleadings, motions, and briefs as necessary
to pursue actions filed against the Administrator
o Manage national inspection/sample analysis contract designed to support
Regional inspection/sample analysis functions.
IMPACT
— Funding establishes baseline toxic enforcement program. Regional
support to case preparation/prosecution and emergency response is
provided; National enforcement program is managed. OTS regulation
development activities are supported. Minimal data analysis/program
evaluation function is performed.
— Not funding terminates Headquarters toxic enforcement role. Regional
case support and national program direction is not provided; Regions
are forced to operate in a national enforcement policy vacuum. Termin-
ation of support of regulation development prevents assessment of new
regulations for enforcement implications.
EPA Form 2410-11 (8-78)
-------
AL PROTECTION AGENCY
FORM n DECISION u*'IT LEVEL ANALYSIS
A. DECISION UNIT TITLE AND COPE H& MfcPl M
L305 TOXIC SUBSTANCES ENFORCEMENT APPRC'I
B. RESOURCE SUMMARY FY 78 ACT FY 79 c". E~" F Y'^O
POSITIONS PFT 23.o 31.0 5.0 38.0
LEVEL HPFT 4.0 4.0 9 0
0? nF 06 FTF 36,7 8,2 ag.3
AUTH. (000.0) 6J6.0 2,198.9 356.1 1,709.7
C. DESCRIBE THE INCREMENTAL ACTIVITIES OF THIS LEVEL ONLY. DESCRIBE THE BENEFITS
OF FUNDING AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FUNDING.
ACTIVITIES
o Audit, appraise and evaluate the national TSCA enforcement program and
adjust enforcement strategies and compliance monitoring priorities as
necessary
— Conduct field level review of five selected Regional programs to assess
understanding of and adherence to Headquarters guidance regarding
enforcement criteria, penalty policy, and compliance monitoring and
enforcement priorities
— Procure and manage contract to support the evaluation and revision of
enforcement strategies which are in the most urgent need of amendment
o Provide support to Regional case preparation/prosecution activities for 19
additional Section 6 (Chemical Control) cases, and 1 additional Section
. 8(a) (Chemical Information) case.
— Advise the Regions regarding assessment of reports, records, or results
of sample analysis
— Confer with the Regions regarding the selection of appropriate remedy,
application of enforcement criteria, and litigation strategy
— Advise and assist Regions in preparing documents and other materials
for the prosecution of the case, arranging for expert witnesses, pre-
paring witnesses for testimony, conducting public hearing
— Advise and assist Regions in preparing briefs on all prehearing, post-
hearing motions or proposed orders
— Develop enforcement policy, appellate strategy and prepare all briefs
and other documents as necessary to pursue any appeal of an initial
decision of the Regional Administrator
o Participate in litigation activities arising out of 1 Section 5(f) (Unrea-
sonable Risk) order.
T- Assist OTS and OGC in the development of litigation strategy
— Participate on litigation team by preparing and presenting in court
that part of the case dealing with (a) the remedies sought by EPA
.V including the feasibility of implementing and monitoring compliance
with such remedies, and (b) the impact upon the firm and the industry
of implementing the remedy
o Provide substantive enforcement input into TSCA regulation development
activities: 2 additional Section 6 (Chemical Control) and 1 additional
Section 4 (Testing) regulation.
— Assure enforceability of regulations
— Identify affected audience
— Develop national enforcement strategies
— Develop national inspection and case preparation procedures
EPA Form 2410-11 (8-78)
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
FORM 2: DECISION UNIT LEVEL ANALYSIS
A. DECISION UNIT TITLE (AND CODE)
TOXIC SUBSTANCES ENFORCEMENT (L305)
HQ OE MEDIA:
Substances
REG. APPRO:Enforcement
B. RESOURCE SUMMARY
FY 78 ACTUAL FY 79 C, EST. FY 80 INCR.
FY80 CUM.
LEVEL
2 6
OF
POSITIONS PFT
OPFT
FTE
BUDGET AUTH. (000.0)
C. DESCRIBE THE INCREMENTAL ACTIVITIESOF THIS LEVEL ONLY. DESCRIBE THE BENEFITS
OF FUNDING AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FUNDING.
o Provide technical support to the Regions for major enforcement actions
arising out of Section 6 (Chemical Control) regulations. (NEIC).
— Collect and analyze enforcement samples in support of large-scale
investigations
— Provide technical advice and expert testimony in support of large-scale
enforcement prosecutions
IMPACT
— Funding increases NEIC and Headquarters case support for Regional
enforcement actions commensurate with Regional projections. Support is
provided for additional OTS regula'tion development activities and pro-
jected Section 5(f) litigation budgeted at this level. Program evalua-
tion function is increased and focuses on audit of Regional programs
and revision of national chemical control enforcement strategies.
— Not funding provides no support to projected increase in Regional
enforcement actions and OTS regulation development. Monitoring of
Regional adherence -to national enforcement policy is inadequate; NEIC
technical case support is limited to emergency episodes.
EPA Form 2410-11 (8-78)
-------
FORM c1: DECISION UNIT LEVEL ANALYSIS
A, DECISION UNIT TITLE AMD CODE HQ MgDJ/n TO* SUB
L305 TOxIC &UBSTANCES ENFORCEMENT APPROi
6, RESOURCE SUMMARY FY 78 ACT FY 79 c. E. FY PO INCR FY BO cu*
POSITIONS PFT 23.0 31.0 3.0 31.0
LEVEL QPFT a.O 4.0 13.0
03 OF Ofc, FTE Jfc.7 7,2 49.5
BljnGET AUTH, CuOO.o) 616.0 2,106.9 4P9.2 2»198,9
C. DESCRIBE THE INCREMENTAL ACTIVITIES OF THIS LEVEL ONLY. DESCRIBE THE BENEFITS
OF FUNDING AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FUNDING.
ACTIVITIES
Provide support to Regional case preparatiqn/prosecution activities for 27
additional Section 6 (Chemical Control) cases, 1 Section 8(e) (Substantial
Risk) case, 1 Section 5 (a) (Premanufacture Notification) case, and 1 Section
13 (Imports) case.
— Advise the Regions regarding assessment of reports, records, or results
of sample analysis
— Confer with the Regions regarding the selection of appropriate remedy,
application of enforcement criteria, and litigation strategy
— Advise and assist Regions in preparing documents and other materials
for the prosecution of the case, arranging for expert witnesses, pre-
paring witnesses for testimony, conducting public hearing
— Advise and assist Regions in preparing briefs on all prehearing, post-
hearing motions or proposed orders
— Develop enforcement policy, appellate strategy and prepare all briefs
and other documents as necessary to pursue any appeal of an initial
decision of the Regional Administrator
Participate in litigation activities arising out of one additional Section
5(f) (Unreasonable Risk) order.
— Assist OTS and OGC in the development of litigation strategy
— Participate on litigation team by preparing and presenting in court
that part of the case dealing with (a) the remedies sought by EPA,
including the feasibility of implementing and monitoring compliance
with such remedies, and (b) the impact upon the firm and the industry
of implementing the remedy
Develop and implement cooperative enforcement agreements with 3 selected
States.
— Prepare program-specific regulations establishing criteria and admini-
strative procedures for allocating funds to States for Cooperative
Enforcement Agreements
— Assist Regions in negotiating specific outputs for Cooperative Enforce-
ment Agreements, consistent with national policy
* — Monitor the performance of States under Cooperative Enforcement Agree-
ments
Audit, appraise and evaluate the Federal/State Cooperative Enforcement
Program.
— In conjunction with appropriate Regions, conduct record and field-level
review of FY-79 Cooperative Programs to assess the extent to which State
performance is consistent with and furthers the national program objec-
tives
EPA Form 2410-1) (8-78)
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
FORM 2: DECISION UNIT LEVEL ANALYSIS
A. DECISION UNIT TITLE (AND CODE)
TOXIC SUBSTANCES ENFORCEMENT (L305)
HQ
REG.
MEDIA:
APPRO:
Toxic
Substances
Enforcement
B. RESOURCE SUMMARY
FY 78 ACTUAL FY 79 C. EST. FY80INCR.
FY80CUM.
LEVEL
-2.0F-1
POSITIONS PFT
OPFT
FTE
BUDGET AUTH. (000.01
C. DESCRtBE THE INCREMENTAL ACTIVITIES OF THIS LEVEL ONLY. DESCRIBE THE BENEFITS
OF FUNDING AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FUNDING.
— Review and amend Regional guidance as necessary to improve Federal/
State Cooperative Enforcement Program .
D Provide substantive enforcement input into TSCA regulation development
activities: 5 additional Section 6 (Chemical Control) regulations, and 1
additional "Section 8 (Chemical Information) regulation.
— Assure enforceability of regulations
— Identify enforcement issues; raise issues to management
— Identify affected audience
— Develop national enforcement strategies
— Develop national inspection and case preparation procedures
5 Provide technical support to the Regions on demand for enforcement actions
arising out of Section 6 (Chemical Control), Section 5 (Premanufacturing),
(Unreasonable Risk), and Section 4 (Testing) regulations. (NEIC).
— Collect and analyze enforcement samples in support of technically
complex investigations
— Provide technical advice and expert testimony in support of technically
complex enforcement prosecutions
IMPACT
— Funding increases NEIC and Headquarters case support for Regional
Enforcement actions commensurate with Regional projections. Support is
provided for additional OTS regulation development activities and
additional Section 5(f) litigation budgeted at this level. Cooperative
State enforcement agreements are added and supplement Regional inspec-
tion resources. State performance of FY 79 cooperative agreement
program is evaluated.
— Not funding provides no support to projected increase in Regional
. enforcement actions and OTS regulation development. Opportunity to
expand inspection resources through State agreements is precluded;
forces entire inspection burden upon Regional resources. Identifica-
tion of substandard FY 79 State grant performance is not accomplished;
may result in continuation of ineffective funding.
0155*
EPA Form 2410-11 (8-78)
-------
EN'Vi^ctN'-'s.NTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
FORM 2: DECISION UNIT LEVEL ANALYSIS
, DECISION UNIT TITLE AMD CODE HQ MEDIA} TOX SUB
305 TOXIC SUBSTANCES ENFORCEMENT APPRO* ENFORCEMENT
B, RESOURCE SUMMARY FY 76 ACT FY 79 C. E. FY BO INCR FY 80 CUM
POSITIONS PFT 23.0 33.0 3.0 3«.0
LEVEL OPFT «.o i.o i«,o
04 OF Ot> FTE 36.7 4,5 5«.0
BUDGET AUTH. (000.0) 616.0 2,198.9 201.5 ?,400.4
C. DESCRIBE THE INCREMENTAL ACTIVITIES OF THIS LEVEL ONLY. DESCRIBE THE BENEFITS
OF FUNDING AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FUNDING.
ACTIVITIES
Provide support to Regional case preparatidn/prosecution activities for 20
Section 6 (Chemical Control) cases, 2 Section 4 (Testing) cases, 1 Section
8(a) (Chemical Information) case, and 1 Section 8(e) (Substantial Risk) case
— Advise the Regions regarding assessment of reports, records, or results
of sample analysis
— Confer with the Regions regarding the selection of appropriate remedy,
application of enforcement criteria, and litigation strategy
— Advise and assist Regions in preparing documents and other materials
for the prosecution of the case, arranging for expert witnesses, pre-
paring witnesses for testimony, conducting public hearing
— Advise and assist Regions in preparing briefs on all prehearing, post-
hearing motions or proposed orders
— Develop enforcement policy, appellate strategy and prepare all briefs
and other documents as necessary to pursue any appeal of an initial
decision of the Regional Administrator
Participate in litigation activities arising out of 1 Section 5(f) (Unrea-
sonable Risk) order, and 1 Section 5(e) (Insufficient Data) order.
— Assist OTS and OGC in the development of litigation strategy
— Participate on litigation team by preparing and presenting in court that
part of the case dealing with (a) the remedies sought by EPA, including
the feasibility of implementing the remedy and monitoring compliance
with such remedies, and (b) the impact upon the firm and the industry
of implementing the remedy
Provide substantive enforcement input into TSCA regulation development
activities: 3 additional Section 6 (Chemical Control) regulations, 2 addi-
tional Section 4 (Testing) regulations, and 1 Section 5 (Significant New Use)
rule.
— Assure enforceability of regulations
— Identify enforcement issues; raise issues to management
— Identify affected audience
. — Develop national inspection and case preparation procedures
IMPACT
— Funding increases case support for Regional enforcement actions commen-
surate with Regional projections. Support is provided for additional
OTS regulation development activities and additional Section 5(e), (f)
litigation budgeted at this level.
— Not funding provides no support to projected increase in Regional enfore
ment actions and OTS regulation development.
EPA Form 2410-11 (8-78)
-------
£f> TAL PROTECTION
FORK; 2: DECISION UNIT LEVEL
A, DECISION IWIT TITLE AND CODE HQ M£UIA| TO* SUB
L3o5 TOXIC SUBSTANCES ENFORCEMENT APPRO* ENFORCEMENT
B, RESOURCE SUMMARY F-Y 78 ACT FY 79 c. E. FY eo INCR FY so CUM
POSITIONS PFT 23.0 31.0 3.0 37.0
LEVFL OPFT «.0 la.u
05 OF ^& FTE 36.7 3.0 57.0
BUDGET AUTH. (G('C.O) 616.0 2,196.9 259.6 2*660.2
C. DESCRIBE THE INCREMENTAL ACTIVITIES OF THIS LEVEL ONLY. DESCRIBE THE BENEFITS
OF FUNDING AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FUNDING.
ACTIVITIES
o Participate in litigation activities arising out of 1 additional Section 5(f)
(Unreasonable Risk) order, and 1 Section 5(e) (Insufficient Data) order.
— Assist OTS and OGC in the development of litigation strategy
— Participate on litigation team by preparing and presenting in court
that part of the case dealing with (a) the remedies sought by EPA,
including the feasibility of implementing and monitoring compliance
with such remedies, and (b) the impact upon the firm and the industry
of implementing the remedy
o Expand effort to audit, appriase and evaluate the national TSCA enforcement
program and adjust enforcement strategies and compliance monitoring priori-
ties as necessary.
— Conduct field level review of 5 additional Regional programs to assess
understanding of and adherence to Headquarters guidance regarding
enforcement criteria, penalty policy, and compliance monitoring and
enforcement priorities
o Develop and implement Cooperative Enforcement Agreements with 2 additional
States.
— Assist Regions in negotiating specific outputs for Cooperative Enforce-
ment Agreements, consistent with national policy
— Monitor the performance of States under Cooperative Enforcement Agree-
ments
o Prepare and publish four TSCA Enforcement Policy Statements to publicize
major enforcement policy determinations.
— Identify enforcement issues of general applicability requiring a policy
statement
— In consultation with OTS and OGC, develop issue-specific enforcement
policy, and draft Federal Register notices
o J-Participate directly in the case preparation/prosecution of 1 additional
criminal case, and in the appellate review of 1 additional civil enforcement
action.
— Participate with FBI, Regions on investigation team for development of
evidence, case preparation of criminal cases
— Participate with DOJ, OGC on litigation team in development of litigatioi
strategy and prosecution of crminal cases, and appeal of civil enforce-
ment actions
— Maintain close liaison with DOJ to expedite subpoenas, warrants, dis-
covery, case preparation/prosecutions of criminal cases, and appeals of
' enforcement actions.
EPA Form 2410-11 (8-78)
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
FORM 2: DECISION UNIT LEVEL ANALYSIS
A. DECISION UNIT TITLE (AND CODE)
TOXIC SUBSTANCES ENFORCEMENT (L305)
HQ OE
REG.
MEDIA -Toxic
. To
'Substances
APPRO5nforcement
B. RESOURCE SUMMARY
FY 78 ACTUAL FY 79 C. EST. FY 80 INCR.
FY 80 CUM.
LEVEL
5 6
OF
LPOSITIONS PFT
OPFT
FTE
BUDGET AUTH. (000.0)
DESCRIBE THE INCREMENTAL ACTIVITIES OF THIS LEVEL ONLY. DESCRIBE THE BENEFITS
OF FUNDING AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FUNDING.
Provide substantive enforcement input into TSCA regulation development
activities: 2 additional Section 6 (Chemical Control) regulation and 1
additional Section 5 (Significant New Use) regulation.
— Assure enforceability of regulations
— Identify enforcement issues; raise issues to management
— Identify affected audience
— Develop national enforcement strategies
— Develop national inspection and case preparation procedures
IMPACT
— Funding provides support for additional OTS regulation development
activities and additional Section 5(e), (f) litigation budgeted at this
level. Additional cooperative enforcement agreements with States are
added to supplement Regional inspection resources. Audit/evaluation of
TSCA enforcement program is expanded to include 5 additional Regions.
TSCA enforcement policy statements are introduced as a means to educate
the TSCA regulation audience concerning major enforcement policy deter-
minations
— Not funding provides no support to additional OTS regulation develop-
ment activities. Regional audit program is limited to selected Regions
this effectively delays substantive program evaluation activities which
must be performed to adjust compliance monitoring strategies. Innova-
tive tool of TSCA enforcement policy statements is eliminated and resu!
in inefficiencies regarding transmittal of enforcement policy to TSCA
regulatory audience.
:s
EPA Form 2410-1 1 (8-78)
-------
U
z
CS
<
>-
z a
o <
M r
^- 1
U 3
hi co
O Ul
C U
CL CC
3
_l 0
« CO
Z CC
I t-
Z 11
o z
tc 3
> z
z o
Ul M
CO
co 11
Ul U
t- Ul
« o
CO —
o
•- cc
** o
Z U.
3
z
Ul
Ul
U
cc.
o
z
co
Ul
U
z
t- «
z »-
in co
Z CC
UI3
u co
c
o u
U. «1
z x
UIO
-> * "*
w AIK»
3
CO
a-
CO
(p'<*>*
» CO
£
z
•1
hi
Al (3
CC Z
9* *1
*"z
i
a.
CD
»
*•
u
tl
o •-
•0 <
x 3
3
u
<~
Ul
o z
CD Ul
e- a
z
CO
O- Ul
r-
o- cc
•« ec
3
o
o- »-
* m
r/1 ^
in 9
Kl C-
"
•c m
x> r-
m 9
Kl CC
—
•o m
KI *»•
in 9
KI o
—
•e m
Kl f~
m 9
Kl 0-
«
»•
-c 4> o in o o ••
m — 9 9 AI KI
—
4> .c oin o o —
KI KI o »— K» in 9
to -a f-v
*
o- o- o AI e o r»
CO CD O O1 ••• 9 ^
t> CO -" KIO K)
••* CD Kl m
« ^ «
Al — —
o o e AI e
•* O- f- — P*>
»• 9 * »*l Al
« a — a
..^^
e
0
o ^~
M t- U. Ul
• Ul CO •— ^
U.X CO 3 0
O •- 3 Z M —
3 C « •>**>
" •« Z tc Z
o •- a> o
^- Z X >- fl
_JU1 HID •< »-
Ul t» »» « _l «-
> c. t- m
U13 30
_l CD O O.
t- CO
C- 45
O er-
•^ "I
-
*^ CO
o- •*>
e o-
^ «•
- —
y» (O
• •
0 49
0 t»
1- —
— —
i- co
t> «
e o-
>^ »*
« ^
»* »M
f^ r^ o «o o o w
O 4> 9 *> Al 9
»- r~ o- —
— M
— •• O !•» O O Al
« « o ^ *n 9 CD
v> m o 9
o- o- o AI e» e*>
CO CD O' C> -^ 9 43
O* CD *^ VO It ft
«•• CD *•> m
Al «~ —
o o era e
49 »• f- — m
4) 9 •< 9
^*
O
o
o t-
Ct «-U- Ul
e < o n. o u.
• u ec o ** +*
u. X co 3 o
o •- 3 r •» «•
3 o« ^ co
Al < X CC Z
o r- co o
»- Z X >- n
_J U! •« UJ « •-
> O »- CO
hi 3 3 O
_i ec o AI
co a
«> Kl
— in
At —
C- Al
CO O
Cf f*\
•" en
Al x
O- Al
CD e^
fr f*l
— m
Al —
0 Al
CD* j£
o- m
•<• vt
« ^
Al —
«> e- o AI o oin
CD CB OO- — KVC*
— o- Aim "*
Al « —
Al Al 09 0 0 Al
O- O- O All*) 9 r-
CD 9 9 V
O- O- O Al O O f»
CO CD O O ""9 4S
O CS -«Klft Kl
>»co Kim
Al «. «<
o e o AI o
4» 9 — a
^^^
0
o
O f~
•» *- U.UJ
O « O CL O U-
• ui ec o «- «-.
h. X CO 3 0
0 «-3Z.«» —
3 O < fc- CO
K* < X CC Z
O H- CO O
H-z X >- M
_JUJ •• UJ « >-
aits •-»- j _
> O »- CO
Ul 3 3 O
_iec on.
SI •*!
0 0
o o
9 4>
Al —
9 Kl
0 0
e CD
9 4>
• ^
Al —
9 Kl
o e
0 CD
9 4>
Al M
9 Kl
0 0
0 CD
a 49
^ ^
Al —
99 O Kl O e O
omm 0999
o «> o co KI •• in
9 t> 9 43
Al — —
mm o -« o oin
— o in — KI — a
Al -« —
o- o- e> ni o o r-
CO CO O O VM 9 4}
— CD K> IT
Al — —
O O O Al O
49 CM- -«K1
-•9 « Kl Al
•e 9 «~ 9
^^
o
0
O K-
CB *- U. Ul
o < on. o u.
• Ul CC O **+^
U.X CO 3 0
o «-3 r •» —
3O « —CO
a« x a z
O 1- CO O
»-Z X >- n
UIU <-> — jn
> O t- CO
It! 3 3 O
-JCE o a
Al Al ^
O CV
•o *
4) CD
Al —
Al Al
O Al
4> -*
49 CD
% »
Al —
Al A)
O Al
4) 4>
49 CD
Al —
Al Al
O Al
O 4)
•e co
Al —
Al Al O AJ O
omm AI ^
•0 m o 49 KI
•4> 0 49 CD J
ra---f
~
CO CD OO 0
O- O- 0 — Kl
mm o cc
At Al —
Cf t> O Al O
co co o o- *•
O- CD -.KlKI
Al — —
O O O Al O
49 O r- —Kl
•• 9 4> Kl Al
«O 9 -• 9
^^
^_
O
o
o « oa.
• uiec o
U.X cos o j
01-31 •» ^
30« — «1
m < x cc H
o i- coo
>•• Z X ^ •*
^J llj M^ U ^ f^
hi (9 •-'<-' _l r»
> O t~ CO
UJ 3 30
_ICD o a.
-------
z
IU
45
Z C
o <
•i X
»- z
«J 3
Ul CO
*-
o u
a u
a a
« co
i- u
z tr
z «
o z
tt =>
•^
» z
z o
n M
to> u
H- U
« O
*-
CO —
I>t
o
u z
t- a
•10
IU -i
Z X
111 O
— CO
z
»N
»-
CO
u
IUC9
S
o- t~
cc
»-
I
Kl
o-
o
.
« a. f-
o o IL
oiei
-------
o
LU
a
z
o
t-
o
UJ
h-
o
CC
a.
UJ
01
5
X
o
u
Z
O
C/5
O
UJ
0162:
'CC
o
a.
0)
o
c
4-> C
CO 0)
43 E
3 0)
W O
)-i
0 O
•H 14-1
k^ C
O W
*?. a:
< O
D Q~
LU Q.
5 <
FT"!
O
O
O LU
I CC
/ — \
u"")
o
CO
H*4
—^
Qw
OS
Qw
*~
^
u.
i
LU
^
UJ
_J
4
-J
i u
LU
«J
J
1
_j
LU
^
UJ
H
^
LU
^>
LU
_1
1
_J
LU
^
UJ
1
_j
Ml
LU
OJ
o>
•" o
> CC
u. a.
LU
CO <
r* 5
o> 5
a. LU
UJ
cc
D
C/5
<
LU
5
c3
UJ
H-
H
K-
Z
UJ
3
^^
I
CO
a.
2
O
o
u
a
vO [^ CO LO O ^f CTs
CM i-( ro
rH
V£) LT% \O CO LT> O ^C
CM n
t-H
CM LO O O
o cn
iH
^•J LO fO C^ ^O G^ ""si"
r^ CM
•
CM in CM o o o IH
m CM
O CO CO " \D O O O
o m
1
o o o o o o in
C -H
O CO 1 -U 1 4-1 T3 C
•HI 0) CB-H 0) C 0)O
4-JCX CO HC O 0) 4J-H>— s
O3 T3CO CO-H Lj g J>^ L44->CO
coco co cx- o' a> o ocfloi
CO 0)1-1 IH CJ -H CX-H60
•W /-x t3 HO C ^ iH CX4Jtfl
CC COO) CX 0) O O 3-H4J
0)O O)-H T3 IH CX COCCO
S-H co> Ola) oi-ac -H
D+-1 COD COW >0)0) 4J COC
O3 O(-i ctlh -i-l 43 C C60O
S-iO OO 4-ICOOTJO) OC-H
OQ) tHO) CX CO^H'HO)B -H-H4-)
into tow cncx SJT-I XB o) -u-aaj
CO Ccd H3 0),C OH O C8360
0))-| -Hr-H OJCO CXCfl 4JO 1-113 !-t r-l i-l
a grH 4J Q4J IHOOJ3O3
H--V -HOI HCD oco I-IH IHJ: bocg
SC HCX d C oo) njoi Ceo cu -H o
O OCX 3O CCXOJ-HH^'Lj
O-H is cr-H aicno rH cx
eocfl O>~. ess n)C M-U CJ3 OCTJ
oii-i cftjj aio 4JO) oi -H cocxc/soic
airt HH 530) crtgce|T3H Hgc8
CX CO CO Q) 3 CO CX
OH OCOOJ OM OH O OC Oi-liH
cx cx4-i cx 60 g o) a) cu
H 13 H H H~~» HCO HCfl HB l-lt>CO
0)0)0) Q) r- 1 O Q)CO 0) 0)H 0)0) Q) (U O
O CO 4-1 ,£1 »H CX ,^ C *T3 4D 4J • , (*i 60 vO 4-* f*> -Q p,
ECSH E>cx Boo) gc go Brt B o
30O D-H3 3-H4J 30) 3H 3JJ 3CH
zi^-'cx ssoro !34-ic3 aE 3cx Zco S-HCX
J
•
^
1
^
^*.
00
t^
1
00
«s
0
5g
1
u.
<
CL
UJ
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
FORM 1: DECISION UNIT OVERVIEW
A) DECISION UNIT TITLE (AND CODE)
TOXIC SUBSTANCES ENFORCEMENT (L305)
HQ MEDIA: Toxic
Substances
REG. XX APPROrEnforcemen
B) LONG RANGE GOALS & MAJOR OBJECTIVESThe fundamental goal of the toxic sub-
stances enforcement program is to protect the public health and the environment
from risks posed by chemical substances through enforcement of the Toxic Sub-
stances Control Act of 1976 (TSCA) and regulations promulgated thereunder.
TSCA and its regulations will establish boundaries for the risks posed by
selected chemicals and define acceptable activity which restricts chemical
risks to those boundaries. The major enforcement program objective then
becomes the implementation of a compliance monitoring effort that detects
activity beyond those boundaries and prosecutes responsible parties as appro-
priate.
C) FY 78 ACCOMPLISHMENTS
FY-78 was the intial "start-up" year of the Regional
toxic substances enforcement program; few TSCA regulations existed to be
enforced in that year. Consequently, Regional activity during FY-78 focused
primarily on supporting the development of integrated toxic substances control
plans. These plans are designed to identify the manner in which TSCA authori-
ties can most effectively be utilized as a supplement to other EPA toxic contro
statutes to produce a cohesive and comprehensive toxic substances control effor
In addition, in the latter portion of FY-78, several TSCA S8(e) (Substantial
Risk) investigations were in progress. These investigations will determine
whether companies or individuals failed to notify EPA regarding potential risks
posed by certain chemical substances.
D) FY 79 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION ^g 57.79 Regional toxic substances enforcement
program includes two major areas of enforcement activity: emergencies and
chemical control. As emergency incidents occur enforcement personnel are
responsible for investigating those incidents to determine if it is appropriate
to initiate legal action under authority of TSCA against the parties alleged
to be responsible for the incident. Enforcement activity of a more routine,
continuous nature includes a compliance monitoring effort regarding 86 ChemicaJ
Control regulations. FY-79 Chemical Control regulations consist of the PCS
Marking and Disposal, PCB Ban, and Chlorofluorocarbon Ban Regulation. Enforce-
ment will monitor compliance with the requirements of these regulations and
initiate enforcement actions upon detection of violations. Other elements of
the FY-79 Regional program include compliance monitoring and enforcement of the
TSCA 813 requirements imposed on chemicals imported into the United States; in-
vestigation of noncompliance with TSCA 88(e) regarding notification to EPA of
chemicals which may present a substantial risk to the public; and assistance in
the negotiation of cooperative State enforcement agreements.
0163
EPA Form 2410-10 (8-78)
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ASFNCY
FORM 2{ DECISION UNIT LEVEL ANALYSIS
A, DECISION UNIT TITLE AND CODE R& MEDIAj TO* SUB
L305 TC'XIC SUBSTANCES ENFORCEMENT APMRPi
B. RFSOURCF SUMMARY FY 76 ACT FY 79 C. E, FY 60 INCR FY 80 CUM
POSITIONS PFT 25.0 30.0 29,0 29,0
LEVEL OPFT i.o i.o 1,0 i.o
01 OF 07 FTE 36,0 35.4 35, fl
BUDGET AUTH, (000,0) «84.0 1,034.3 759,2 759,2
C. DESCRIBE THE INCREMENTAL ACTIVITIES OF THIS LEVEL ONLY. DESCRIBE THE BENEFITS
OF FUNDING AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FUNDING.
ACTIVITIES
At this level all Regions are allocated a- minimal Toxic Substances enforce-
ment staff. Resources allow performance of two fundamental program activi-
ties: emergency response and chemical control enforcement. The emergency
response activity involves the legal investigation of toxic substance emer-
gency incidents for the purpose of determining the propriety of initiating
an enforcement action under authority of TSCA against parties alleged to be
responsible for such incidents. This activity represents the top program
priority at all levels. However, it is not anticipated that resources at
this level will be completely allocated to this activity. Rather, emer-
gency incidents will occur from time to time with unpredictable frequency.
On these occasions investigation and subsequent litigation activities
regarding emergency incidents will be performed.
Activity of a more predictable and routine nature includes compliance moni-
toring and enforcement of TSCA §6 chemical control regulations. In FY-80
three such regulations will be in place: the PCB Marking and Disposal, PCB
Ban, and Chlorofluorocarbon Ban regulations. Regional activity will includ
performance of on-site inspections on facilities subject to the requirement;
of these regulations; and subsequent initiation of enforcement actions upon
detection of regulatory violations. Within this category of activity
compliance monitoring and enforcement of the PCB regulations is the major
priority and will require the bulk of compliance resources. Chlorofluoro-
carbon compliance activity will generally only be initiated at the Regional
level upon referral of information from Headquarters concerning the necessi
ty of performing an inspection. Resources at this level allow for inspec-
tions of approximately 59% of high priority PCB facilities.
IMPACT
— Funding establishes baseline Regional toxic substances enforcement
program. Resources provide for emergency response and chemical control
enforcement activity. A measurable but limited enforcement presence is
established nationwide.
— Not funding eliminates TSCA enforcement function at the Regional level.
No inspections of facilities subject to TSCA requirements occur. Emer-
gency investigations and enforcement actions are not initiated.
018 »t
EPA Form 2410-11 (8-78)
-------
PROTECTION' AGENCY
FORM dt DECISION UNIT LEVEL ANALYSIS
A. DECISION UNIT TITLE AND CODE RG MEDIAt TOX SUB
L305 TOXIC SUBSTANCES ENFORCEMENT APPRO! ENFORCEMENT
R, RESOURCE SUGARY
POSITIONS PFT
LEVEL OPFT
02 OF 07 FTE
BUDGET AUTH, (000.0)
FY 78 ACT FY
25.0
I."
484.0
79 C. E.
39.0
1.0
38.0
1,034.3
FY 80 INC«
6.0
3.0
246.5
FY BO CUM
35.0
1.0
36,4
1,005.7
C. DESCRIBE THE INCREMENTAL ACTIVITIES OF THIS LEVEL ONLY. DESCRIBE THE BENEFITS
OF FUNDING AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FUNDING.
ACTIVITIES
The primary output of this level is an increase in the TSCA §6 compliance
monitoring and enforcement effort. Additional resources allow additional
facility inspections and enforcement actions to be performed. Resources
allow for inspection of 69% of high priority PCB facilities. Additional
activities include providing enforcement support for implementation of
the Regional toxic substances control plans and initiation of efforts to
induce voluntary industry compliance with TSCA. Performance of these
additional activities will vary from Region to Region as chemical control
inspection schedules and workload allow; priority activity at this level
remains attainment of PCB inspection "output target.
IMPACT
— Funding broadens TSCA §6 compliance net by providing additional inspec-
tions of major PCB facilities.
— Not funding limits TSCA 86 inspections to Level 1 output.
0165
EPA Form 2410-11 (8-78)
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
FORM 2: DECISION UNJT LEVEL ANALYSIS
A. DECISION UNIT TITLE AND CODE RG MEPIAj TOX SUB
L305 TOXIC SUBSTANCES ENFORCEMENT APPRO* ENFORCEMENT
B. RESOURCE SUMMARY
POSITIONS PFT
LEVEL OPFT
03 OF 07 FTE
BUDGET AUTM. (000,0)
FY 78 ACT FY
25.0
l.o
484,0
79 C. E.
39.0
1.0
38,0
1,034,3
FY BO I NCR
6,0
4.0
139,7
FY 80 CUM
41.0
l.o
43.4
1,145.4
C. DESCRIBE THE INCREMENTAL ACTIVITIES OF THIS LEVEL ONLY. DESCRIBE THE BENEFITS
OF FUNDING AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FUNDING.
ACTIVITIES
Regions attain resources to perform inspections on 82% of high priority
PCB facilities. In addition, resources allow for minimal compliance moni-
toring and enforcement activity regarding TSCA 84 testing requirements,
88 chemical information reporting requirements, and 813 imported chemical
requirements. Regional activity in these areas will be low in relation to
86 chemical control enforcement activity. Section 4, 8, 13 inspections
and follow-up actions will generally be initiated only in response to case
referrals from Headquarters. However, activity in these areas will occur
on a relatively regular basis. Attainment of PCB facility inspection out-
put target remains top priority at th'is level.
IMPACT
— Funding increases PCB facility inspection coverage. TSCA compliance
broadened beyond chemical control requirements to include other major
requirements of the Act.
— Not funding jeopordizes attainment of TSCA 86 major PCB facility inspec-
tions. No enforcement beyond chemical control requirements occurs.
016S
EPA Form 2410-11 (8-78)
-------
u
z
bJ
O
^
Z tX.
o <
«-« I
H- X
(J 3
UJ 03
o ui
CC L>
ft n*
3
_l O
< CO
»- UJ
Z CC
UJ
X »-
Z M
o z
CC 3
> r
z o
UJ «-•
CO
CO t-i
UJ U
•- UJ
« o
o
z u.
3
Z
UJ
X
tu
CE
O
U.
z
111
CD
tu
u
z
<
^
CD
CD
3
m
m o
z •->
ox
•-O
19 »-
Ul
CE in
0
I-KI
tr _i
9
B
0
KI
CC
O- —
•• BO
tu
co
tu
rats
B Z
t> >-•
— Z
Z
CL
B
O
*•
UJ
_,
o >-
CO «
t> _l
z
(J
»-
IU
o z
B UJ
O CC
«•« U
z
n
o* tu
e> o:
-•CE
u
_j
t- 3
O- »-
••O
<
IU 9
O- •"
IH f^
m 9
o- —
in KI
i- in
IM 9
• •
O- "
m KI
i~ m
ni 9
e> —
m KI
^ in
nim o 9 o o 9
o r- tw » o wi
m v^ B KI m KI
*•• < in
(UfVI O 9 O O 9
o- »^ «\j — c> — in
mr>- B KI ni KI
r- « in
KI K» O O O O
99 9- O* *•• B
KI KI (U KI KI
o o r-
« «
VM ••
O O CO O O
99 B ifl ••
B S KIM
99 KI
.^*
O
o
0 t-
c* t-u. uj
»^ ^ _J — u. a t-
o < o D. ou.
• ui ce o ^~
u. x en 3 o
o »- 3 x «« —
3 0 < —•CO
-• < X «E Z
0 •- CO O
i— z x >- »
_l UJ 1-1 UJ < •-
U) O-"-- -Jl-1
> O »- CO
UJ 3 3 O
_ia> o a.
t~ 0
in 9
o o
0 f-
^- o
in 9
0 0
o r-
-
••» o
• •
10 9
O O
o r-
-
»- 0
in 9
o o
o »-
—
-
»- »^ 0 0 00 9
in KIAJ 9 tn»B
O (VB O KI KI
o o- t-
1^
-
tncn « o o
•C -D m « Kt
99 r-
nj nj —
KIKI 0000
KI KI - M
_J UI «M UJ ^ •-
UIO «^ V_ o »- co
UI 3 30
_icc on.
9 B
m —
9 0
— B
9 B
m —
9 O
«•>* B
-
9 B
• •
in —
9 0
-
9 tf>
* •
in —
9 0
— B
-
9 9 OB O O 9
Ifl KlfVI — — — IM
9 « B O 9 O
— O B
^ ^
- —
^- r» BO o
O- O- +~ O 9
KIKI c>
*• «•*
K»KI O O O O
99 90 -««P
KIKI At KI KI
o o r~
00 BOO
99 B in —
B B KltV
99 KI
_^^
O
O
O *•
« t-u. ui
o « o a. on.
•UJ CC O ****
u. x co 3 e
O *- 3 X •» «•
3 O « — CO
Kl« X tE Z
0 »- CO O
t- Z X >- N»
_iui Mbt« »-
UJ O « V» J M
> O •- eo
UI 3 3 O
_ieo on.
t
c-
o
01C7
-------
2
UJ
O
<
•z.
o
H
O
UJ
I-
O
cc
o.
UJ 0;
2 w
2 W
UJ
I
to
O
O
O
2
O
o
UJ
O
me
'a:
O
u.
9
o
c
CO 4-1
4J C
co a
-a E
3 CU
C/3 O
M
cj o
"rl ^W
X CJ
o w
• . CL
< o
D ?
UJ o_
5 <
X
X
C5
O UJ
x rr
m
o
CO
.E (AND CODE)
INFORCEMENT (L
_iW
UNIT Til
TANCES
A DECISION
TOXIC SUBS
CO
(-
Z
UJ
I
to
Z]
D.
O
u
o
UJ
<
_J
D
D
o
CO
en
r"
^
u.
I
§
— J
UJ
>
UJ
-1
J
UJ
UJ
~*
UJ
^
UJ
1
_J
UJ
>
UJ
_l
N
-J
UJ
^
UJ
1
1
Ul
0)
en •
r" O
> o:
u. o.
UJ
CO -S Q)C04JSH-( CUCfl
CXC OCUCO OM OCU^' OH
O-H CU-HQ) MO CU-H MOCO
M _ CX>H O4J a>« O-HM
CXC COCU3 U- 14-lCCB M-lC
OOO-H O O-H O-HM
COC MO 4J MO COO
MCCU MO4J. MCO MO4-I MOO
CD O 60 0)4-1 OIC CU4J CU CO K
.C-HM JD-H4J »Q-H J3-H4J & 0)
E4JCU ECO gcfl ECO ET3H
3OE 3OQ) 360 3OO) 3O>3
ZcflQ) 2! g T-) Zcfl ZS'O Z4JM
co in
H ro
CN
\D CN
H
H CN
CO
0 0
, t
CU ,O CO
O3 -H -
C CO CO 4-1 00
CO 4-1 -H
•H CO C C •>
H CU 0) -H in
a, -H E
E 4-1 0) CO -
O-HM c sr
O H -H O CD
H 3 -H an
T3 O CT 4J
C cfl 0) O u-i
CO iw M cfl O
CO <4-l CO 4J Cfl
c o H CM
o cu o
•H co » E 4.)
4-1 S 00 CU Cfl
0 CU OH
01 -H .. MOW
CL > in o -H 4J
CO 0) 14-1 > C
,C M • C H
•H »3- 0) 4-) E
60 CD CO 0)
14-1 C CD 14-1 C M
O-H O -H i-l
MO CO 3
M O 4-1 M 60 CT
CU 4-1 CU cfl 0)
J3 -H 4J 43 M
EGO E TJ
3 O CU 3 CU CO
Z E -n Z 4J H
J
J
•
^
1
00
CO
i
0
u.
OL
-------
PESTICIDES MEDIA
CONTENTS
PAGE
A. MEDIA RESOURCE SUMMARY 169
B. MEDIA OVERVIEW 170
C. MEDIA RANKING 179
D. BUDGET REQUEST BY DECISION UNIT 182
E. DECISION UNIT DESCRIPTIONS AND
LEVELS
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT-.. 186
ABATEMENT AND CONTROL 225
ENFORCEMENT 297
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
FY 1980 OMB REQUEST
Pesticides
Media Resource Summary
FY 1979 FY 1980 Change
(dollars in thousands)
Research & Development
Permanent Positions 132
Budget Authority 9,898.2
Abatement & Control
Permanent Positions 727
Budget Authority 42,551.7
Enforcement
Permanent Positions 146
Budget Authority 13,051.3
Total
Permanent Positions 1,005
Budget Authority 65,501.2
152
11,293.0
788
40,131.2
118
13.058.7
+20
+1,394.8
+61
-2,420.5
-28
+7.4
1,058
64,482.9
+53
-1,018.3
-------
PESTICIDES MEDIA OVERVIEW
I. OVERVIEW AND STRATEGY
The objective of the pesticide program is to protect the public
health and the environment from unreasonable pesticide risks while per-
mitting the introduction of necessary pest control technologies. This
objective is pursued through four principal means: (1) review of
existing and new pesticide products, which provides the principal means
for safeguarding public health, (2) use management, (3) enforcement, and
(4) research and development.
Review
New pesticide products are reviewed and registered upon a finding
that the product will not pose unreasonable risks to humans or the
environment, taking into consideration the economic, social, and envir-
onmental costs and benefits stemming from use of the pesticide. The
1972 amendments to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide
Act (FIFRA) contain the basic provisions for the review and registration
of pesticides.
The 1972 amendments require the review and reregistration of all
33,000 Federally and 7,500 State-registered products now on the market,.
Most of these existing products were originally registered before the
chronic effects of exposure to toxic chemicals were thoroughly under-
stood and prior to enactment of the 1972 amendments. Their registration
thus requires a more thorough review of all test data for both acute and
chronic effects, a process that requires a much higher level of resources
than was required for the original registration effort. Evidence has
surfaced that some of the original data used for registration was based
upon health effects testing that was not consistent with current day
scientific standards, or that was conducted in a questionable or even
fraudulent manner. This, too, calls for a more in-depth review of the
data before registration can be accomplished.
The FY 1980 budget is based upon the presumption that the proposed
amendments to FIFRA will be enacted. If the Act is not changed, the
budget estimates and the planned FY 1980 outputs will require revision.
In order to use resources efficiently, the Agency has developed a
new approach to reregistration—developing generic standards for each
of the chemicals currently used in pesticide products. While there
are about 1,400 possible chemicals for which standards could be developed,
EPA will concentrate its efforts on the 514 chemicals currently used as
active ingredients in registered products. (The list of 1,400 was first
reduced to 991 chemicals by grouping together several constituents of
active ingredients, such as salts, acids, and esters, and then to 514
chemicals by eliminating those chemicals not currently used in pesticide
products or treated as "inert" ingredients). Several mixture and
0170
-------
formulation standards will be developed for each chemical standard pro-
duced. Residue tolerances, previously established under authority of
the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, will also be reviewed and
specified for each of the food or animal feed crops to which the chemical
is applied. Finally, all pesticide products that use the chemical as
an active ingredient and meet the stipulations of the standard will be
reregistered.
Production of generic standards will begin in Fiscal Year 1979 —
made possible by the increase to Office of Pesticide Programs resources
that was included in the Fiscal Year 1979 budget. A prototype standard,
for the chemical metolachlor, was completed in Fiscal Year 1978.
To remove quickly from the market those pesticides that pose an ad-
verse risk, a special program, Rebuttable Presumption Against Registra-
tion (RPAR), has been developed. Under this program, suspect chemicals
are subjected to focused benefit/risk assessment. Much of the benefit
data for this assessment is developed by the Department of Agriculture
and the Department of Interior. There are currently 65 chemicals on the
RPAR list. Agency decisions have been made on one chemical (17 other
chemicals have been voluntarily withdrawn from the market after dis-
closure of risk through the RPAR process), and reviews will be completed
on another 23 products in Fiscal Year 1979.
Other programs which are key elements of the program to review pesti-
cide products include the following.
1. Registration, which enables new products to enter the market.
Under this program, new pesticide products are registered, and current
registrations are amended for new uses or new formulations. Registration
activity will increase in Fiscal Years 1979 and 1980 for two principal
reasons: clarification of the trade secret provisions of FIFRA, through
the soon-to-be-enacted amendments, and implementation of the conditional
registration provision of the new amendments. This change will permit
products, especially those containing old active ingredients, to be
registered under simplified procedures before a generic standard is
developed.
2. Special Registration, which covers all activities relating to
the issuance of experimental use permits under section 5 of FIFRA to
generate data for registration, the issuance of emergency exemptions
under section 18, and the issuance of Section 24(c) special local need
registrations, which are handled largely by the States with Federal
oversight.
3. Tolerances, which provides for the establishment of pesticide
residue tolerances on food and animal feed crops under the Federal Food,
Drug and Cosmetic Act.
0171
-------
4. Laboratory Audits, which allow laboratories that perform animal
toxicity and chronic effects testing for applicants and registrants to
be audited to confirm that their procedures are sound and that their
test results are valid.
Use Management
The second major element of the pesticide program is use management.
Pesticides are classified, based upon their potential harm through mis-
use, for either restricted or general use. Only trained and certified
applicators may apply pesticides classified for restricted use. The
training and certification of applicators, either private or commercial,
is a task managed largely by the States. To date, all but two States
(Colorado and Nebraska) have elected to assume the program, with Federal
financial assistance. EPA operates the certification and training pro-
grams in these two states.
Enforcement
The pesticides enforcement program is designed to support the objec-
tives of regulating pesticide supply and use. The program emphasizes
increased State involvement through Federal/State cooperative enforce-
ment grants. Through such grants, the States are able to support compre-
hensive enforcement programs and bring local expertise into the national
regulatory effort. In FY 1980 EPA will continue its efforts to in-
volve most or all of the States and Territories in this program. Enforce-
ment activities, either carried out by participating States, or by EPA in
those States not having grants, will focus on the general areas of in-
suring industry compliance with registration, classification, and labeling
requirements. Criminal investigations will continue on alleged data
fraud in private testing laboratories.
Research and Development
The research program places emphasis on three basic elements necessary
to evaluate overall human health and environmental hazards from pesticides:
(1) identification of the population at risk, (2) assessment of individual
exposure, and (3) determination of adverse effects. To make hazard
estimates in any given situation, there is a need for quantitative esti-
mates for each of these elements. Registrants have already provided
much data on adverse effects. Although there is a continuing need for
effects research, particularly on new compounds, first priority will be
placed on exposure assessment, because there is currently little data
available on this topic. Exposure assessment research will cover the
development of protocols to determine occupational exposure to pesticides
through their use, general population exposure through all media, and
exposure of nontarget fish and wildlife. In addition, and as called for
in FIFRA, the pesticide management program is developing "biologically
integrated alternatives" to chemical pesticides to control agricultural
and urban pests (primarily insects and weeds). As these are integrated
with other pest control practices (including chemical pesticides), they
0172
-------
comprise an integrated management research program. Finally, in FY 1980
additional emphasis will be given to the quality assurance program.
II. RANKING CRITERIA AND PRIORITIES
The ranking criteria and priorities that guided the development of
the pesticide program for Fiscal Year 1980 are the following.
• Prepare generic pesticide registration standards, including the
reassessment of tolerances, and develop procedures to integrate
with the RPAR process. Develop protocols for exposure assessment
and effects assessment for human health and the environment,
and test compounds of interest when required for regulatory
purposes.
• Implement a conditional registration program and process new
registration applications in an efficient, effective manner,
giving priority to innovative, environmentally protective com-
pounds. Develop protocols for registration of biological and
other third generation pest control technologies.
• Review benefits and risks of compounds identified as posing
potentially unreasonable adverse effects, reach final risk/
benefit determinations, and reduce health and environmental im-
pact, if necessary, by restriction or removal from the market
for some or all uses. This includes research input into risk
assessment, particularly for health and ecology risks.
• Initiate enforcement actions, using both EPA headquarters and
regional office resources, in emergency situations involving sub-
stantial threats to public health or safety. Provide transfer
of information from research data base on exposure assessment
and effects assessment to headquarters and regions in a useable
form to support these actions.
• Audit laboratories to assure data validity. Provide basic quality
control tools and update analytical chemical methods for OPP con-
tract laboratories.
• Establish, support, and strengthen Federal-State cooperation in
the enforcement of FIFRA.
• Enforce Federal certification of applicators, monitor and up-
grade State applicator certification programs, and continue
Federal certification in Colorado and Nebraska and for Federal
agencies. Develop certification, training, and enforcement
programs with the Indian Nations.
• Incorporate IPM strategies into special regulatory actions (e.g.,
section 18 emergency exemptions, and RPARs) when technically
appropriate. Regional offices collect and provide information
0173
-------
on 0PM techniques to headquarters for use in special registrations
and RPAR reviews and to State applicator training programs. Co-
operate with USDA and other agencies in carrying out research to
develop a data base on effectiveness of IPM.
III. FISCAL YEAR 1980 PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
The proposed Fiscal Year 1980 program provides for an increase in the
production of registration standards in order to complete the reregistra-
tion, in roughly a decade, of approximately 40,000 pesticides. Most of
these products have never been scrutinized for chronic, low-level, long-
term effects. The RPAR process will be completed on the majority of the
65 chemicals originally listed as RPAR candidates. Programs will be re-
oriented to merge the RPAR process with standards development by 1981.
High levels of quality and timeliness on special registrations will be
maintained and process improvements made to keep close check on all head-
quarters, regional, and State section 5(f), 18, and 24(c) actions.
Registration and tolerance activities will be increased to deal with an
increased quantity of registrations granted, for the most part on a
conditional basis, presuming the new legislative amendments are enacted.
Headquarters and regional certification and training activities will
center on recertification of private and commercial applicators, the
development of Indian Nation plans, and amendments to State plans.
With emphasis on the State role in the pesticides enforcement pro-
gram through the grant mechanism, the Federal role will continue to
shift from traditional Federal inspection activities to grant management
and oversight, import surveillance, Federal enforcement, of Federal certi-
fication of applicators where States do not have an applicator certifi-
cation program, investigations and follow-up enforcement related to
laboratory data audits, and section 18 monitoring.
The Fiscal Year 1980 research and development program calls for
modest increases in health and ecological efforts. A new effort will
provide exposure models and testing protocols based upon transport and
transformation characteristics. Ecological effects research will aim at
increasing the number of compounds under study and development and valida-
tion of test protocols. The IPM program will remain an extramural effort
centering on development of methods and approaches to pest control which
reduce adverse environmental effects and costs from traditional methods
of pest control. Quality assurance has been increased to assist in
development of reference materials and performance evaluation samples.
IV. REQUEST SUMMARY
FY 1980 Total Changes from FY 1979
PFT BA ($000) PFT BA ($000)
Abatement and Control 788 40,131.2 +61 -2,420.5
Registration Standards,.. J.97 12,452.3 +36 +1,132.0
0174
-------
This increase will be used to accelerate completion of the non-
prototype generic standards that were initiated in Fiscal Year 1979»and
to cement the standards production and maintenance process as a workable
regulatory means of reregistering pesticides. Because the production
phase of a standard extends beyond a 12 month period, the first standards
will be completed in 1980 after prior year initiation. The resources
will also be used to prepare a plan for integration of RPAR into the
registration standards process in anticipation of a process merger by
Fiscal Year 1981.
RPAR Chemical Reviews 161 12,246.6 -24 -2,870.8
Headquarters 156 12,108.7 -17 -2,690.8
This decrease in resources for rebuttable presumptions reflects the
reduction of program activity as work is completed on the initial two
lists of chemicals first accepted as RPAR candidates. The completion
of work on the bulk of these initial 65 chemical classes will provide
experience for merging the RPAR program with registration standards by
1981. Similarities between the RPAR and registration standards processes
illustrate the cost-effectiveness of combining future RPAR investigations
with standards production; this decrease in RPAR resources is paired with
an increase in registration standards resources in preparation for a
merger of these processes.
Regions 5 137.9 - 7 -180.0
This decrease reflects the diminished priority of Regional partici-
pation in the RPAR process as compared to special registration and
pesticide use management activities. The Fiscal Year 1980 headquarters
RPAR process will be completing those review phases for which the regions
supply comments on position documents, assessment team reports, benefits
information, and specialized area information. Hence the Regional RPAR
role will diminish.
Special Registration 82 2,030.5 +11 +47.1
Headquarters 66 1,621.2 +2
The additional positions will provide the process checking measures
required to maintain a responsive program. Receipt of all section 18
emergency exemptions will be acknowledged, all section 5 experimental
use permits and section 18 final reports will be filed, additional re-
vised labels will be reviewed for agreement with the terms of each
special registration, and a sampling program will be established to
evaluate the scientific validity and legal adequacy of data submissions.
Regions 16 409.3 +9 +47.1
These resources will improve regional ability to review section 18
emergency exemption requests, section 5 experimental use permits, section
24(c) special local needs registrations and temporary tolerance petitions,
and better insure that the terms accompanying the applications (e.g.,
acreage and time limitations) are correct before transmittal of the
0175
-------
requests to headquarters. Some decentralization of special registration
activity will also be possible from OPP to the regions, especially where
particular area knowledge is important to the Agency's decisions. The
24(c) special local needs registration program is a likely candidate for
such transfer, depending upon the outcome of pilot regional efforts in
Fiscal Year 1979.
Registration 244 8,249.4 +17 -221.2
Because of the legislative changes expected to be enacted by the
beginning of Fiscal Year 1979 that will permit conditional registrations
and free strictures in the registration process, an increase is expected
in regulatory decision-making in 1980 on applications for administrative
and technical amendments, new chemical registrations, and routine re-
gistrations. The submission of such applications, which have been stymied
until the new legislative changes are made, will suddenly increase in
1979 and require additional positions. A reduction in funds is antici-
pated when 1979 contracts for conditional registration startup are
terminated.
Tolerances 57 1,319.6 + 6
This increase in positions is due to the expected increase in demands
for conditional registrations and a concomitant increase in tolerance
petitions.
Pesticides Use Management..47 3,832.8 +15 -507.6
Headquarters 16 2,609.3 - -521.9
Applicator certification and training and restricted use pesticide
activities will continue at 1979 levels. Legal and funding assistance
will be provided to regions for State and Federal certification programs,
and development of Indian certification plans will continue. IPM will
continue to be incorporated into regulatory processes and some instruc-
tional material disseminated in accordance with section 4(c) of FIFRA.
Regions 31 1,223.5 +15 +14.3
This increase will permit the regions to provide a higher level of
service—as is required of a national pesticide program. It will enable
Regional Offices to provide assistance to registrants and small formu-
lators who cannot afford to send representatives directly to headquarters
as can large corporations. It will also improve State and Federal agency
certification programs and support Federal programs in Nebraska and
Colorado.
FY 1980 Total Changes from 1979
PFT BA ($000) PFT BA ($000)
Enforcement 118 13,058.7 -28 +7.4
-------
Pesticides Enforcement/ 18 10,102.2 -6 +543.0
Grants
Fiscal Year 1980 activities include a continued decrease in tradi-
tional Federal inspectional activities offset by an increase in Federal/
State cooperative enforcement grants, and investigations and enforcement
related to laboratory data audits.
Pesticides Enforcement 100 2,956.5 -22 -535.6
Regions 72 1,875.5 -13 -281.9
Headquarters 28 1,081.0 -9 -253.7
Fiscal Year 1980 activities include a continued decrease in tradi-
tional Federal inspection activities, offset by increased State over-
view and grant management responsibilities. Other Fiscal Year 1980
regional activities include import surveillance, Federal enforcement
of Federal certification of applicators, and enforcement support of
laboratory data audits.
FY 1980 Total Changes from FY 1979
PFT BA ($000) PFT BA ($000)
Research and Development 152 11,293.0 +20 +1,394.8
Health Effects 79 6,312.0 +7 +573.8
Protocol research and development activities will be expanded in the
area of human exposure determination. Capability for toxicological
testing of an increased number of pesticides will also be provided.
Ecological Effects 57 2,816.0 +5 +256.0
Using representative generic, RPAR, and other pesticide compounds,
protocol development and validation will be hastened. Additional numbers
of compounds will be examined.
Pesticides Management - 1,200.0
The 1980 funding level for Pesticides Management is the same level
as for 1979. The major program change involves increased research on
totally integrated insect and weed control systems, including in-
creased technology transfer.
Quality Assurance 9 440.0 +1 +40.0
A new program will be initiated to develop special quality control
reference materials and performance evaluation samples and tools for
biological testing laboratories. These new tools will allow quantiative
comparisons to be made of the analytical performance of biological
testing laboratories.
0177
-------
Transport, Fate and 7 525.0 + 7 +525.0
Exposure including
characterization and
measurement methods
development
During 1980, these resources will be used to (1) provide scientific
assistance to The Office of Pesticide Programs, (2) develop exposure
assessment models for pesticides in food chains, other media, and
humans, (3) perform transport and fate research on selected pesticides
in aquatic, air, marine, and terrestrial environments, (4) develop testing
protocols for pesticides, and (5) carry out exposure analyses of selected
pesticides.
0170
-------
•- a x
— OJ «
3: I —
a.
•- t»
tu 2
UJ ~
k>- ex
Jz =2
' yj Z «J
z a:
z e
3 x «
a O-.
" a
> "O UJ
05
UJ
to.
z
Z
s •-
u.
U 0.
Z u.
a.
X i
ooooooooooooooo
ooooo
••^•'>« — i
_ .. rw «v ">
oc^oocoooocoocoGocioooooooooooeoooooooooooooo
eosoe'eooeooo
o o o o o o
•• ••» •
KI rx nj rvi — -,
oeoeoooeoeo
occ— •oruaoo-o—
coeeee
ee o o o e> o o
-%i< — « « r»i »^ ru
oe
in <:
eoeoe
c
2 2 n
3 S Z
z
"«
z
Z 2
— U1UJ
03 Z Z
UJ u* UJ
a. ts 49
• i < <
i 03 Z 2
2 OJ Z
~ 321
u. uJ uj
U- 05 05
*.•=> S
a a uJ
n tr,
I UJ 03
: u
u
z a.
yj i
(_) UJ 1_>
Z U E
O2 »
u. « u.
2* Z
OJ S UJ
cr>
05 CO
O UJ
E BL Z 2
« to. I 3 3
03 n to. •«
2 UJ to- to. to.
o. u « «
i uJ e E
05 U. to-to-
03
o
o en 05
to. UJ
03 to. to. I
uJ 03 03 oJ
a. uj tu a ;
a. i
z
to.
=>
(9
Z to. 0} to.
09 O 2
: uj UJ K u)
i a a. < z
E E
to. to.
03 09
O C
UJ U> IS
Z Z Z
UJ
» UJ ul Z
« s a 3
z z z z
3 3 O 3
E E Z Z
to- I— to. to.
03 03 0309
<«j2z
U C S
MI-IM
CSUU
O -«•"•
U> -I
a. 3
09 to-
I Z —~ I O UJ
ZUJto.uJUJ«(to>(M)Uj2W «K
«o.uouz«to«e z
.. . >-luJZ2 EltoZ^-3 >-»-E
09 05h^to.to> 05COU.-«[mujz z 03tuuj03
Z Uulto>toa.r>ZuJ0305SCl.D.to> z « ^ to. «-
O UJ CSUOSul 0303 UJ
uJ^Ufta*UJU.4C£Eto.to»^«(«<|UEUJ^to.tAJ*«to«uJUJUJffuJto.ESEE
S O4UUJC; «>2to.to- U>^
— vi-Kz to,_jjo:te 11 >->• •• j« >• a—ujuji-i « « _»z a: _i_j _i_j
to>M}to.to(UJMJvJ^)(Jtoto.U^_jMMto.3;Zto.UJUJtJUJto«tH>bJ(lJv)
09<09C£toJ^3uJUJ(5£9^O^uJ«4S9UJU4uJUJ
>uiua.a.ujuiuju33ujb.z3iuuja.a.ujzza.3uia.o.a.&.
rujeoc3EZZujO3a.05-.3Q:a.trza.—to.ir>-.a:cntnen05
U.U.U.U.k.U.U.k.U.U.U.U.U.U.U.U.U-U.U.U.U.U.U.U.U.U.U.U.U.U.U. U-'U. U.U.U.U.U.U.U.U.U.U.U.
osccocoscccsocoososoeooscoecooooocisscececoor
irxxzrrzzzzxxxzxzrzsxziirrrzrzrzzrzzxxzzzzz
-j^a^»»stnc»o/>i/^miriotf>OiPX>oinj^sipa^oircj^(/i»co»»»j^s>ein»>iiriir>
O — — -i»rvjc>— 35roi\j3r.t — lj'v3-«ru-wo — — — •s'V'M—'Oru — — — —
VX'VJX'VM— — I\J-U1— •^'^J'VJ— — •U'VJ'VJ-U— — — —MM— — -y^.MM-VJ-.— •V'fvJ'VJ-uru'V'VJ
oooeeooeooeoeeeeeoeoooeoeeoeoooeoooeooeeoooe
-------
tCUON AGENCY
UfcST
LE
.NVIRUNMENTAL PRU1
)80 UMB BUDGE 1 NEC
MEDIA RANKING 1*t
CO
uj >-
*- U.
O
OJ
z
d
z •-
< w
O O
o o
Z X
a o
— a-
UJ lt(
IT -C
0 0
r-t^-o-^w-a cr-eM*! — -* oo9<-"^tft«no9r-a>a>ccaDo-c—tr'O— co—cf-ooooo
oo o o o o o co
o o o o oooooooooooocoo oooooooocoo o
5 (
o
UJ
K
> UJ > > >
UJ C5 UJ UJ UJ
3 _J -1 -J J_l _J _J
»- o •- a: et •- ~- ztxzccz
c^ BO co en co co co co
.- •- z z ao>-z z cocos
zzz >- z zzzz z zzzzz
Z Z UJ UJ Z COUJ Z ZUJUJUJZZZ
UJ UJ Z £L O. UJ Z uJCX UJuJaJuJZCIiltiZuJiiJujZuJUJUJiiJaJ
UJUJ^COCOCO UJ N BO ICO uJ»**I*aJiMZZZNI*UoJUJ**M*n*'>**»''IM»
o u o: *- 1— uJ u K uj UJ*- u(-)(_>ua«««o:U(jLj>— uuuuu
u. u. a: u- u. co u. z co «u_ u.09cQu.a:utuJujzu.u.u.^-cococococa
z r x u. u. »- z x »- z u. zujujzxmcocnxzzzcoujuJteJUJuj
UJ XZUZOCOZXZ (S
UJ 'f ' "• ' LJ ^_* n i Q uj Q» ft ^J O t* t ^ ut 3 * * jL CL ^ ^J Z Z uj klj -' ' UJ UJ ubj ^ " * UJ Q ZZZZZ
cooooo oooooooooooccooooooocooocooooocc-
o o o o o o ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo —
xxxxrx xzxzxxxzxxxzzzzxxxxxzzxxzxzxxxxx1
!!octo-^ ^^^ottt-^^^m^o-^^^o^o-^^
o o o o o o oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo