f/EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office Of The
Chief Financial Officer
(271OA)
EPA-190-R-01-001
March 2001
          U.S. Environmental
          Protection Agency
          Fiscal Year 2000
          Annual Report

-------
                                       MISSION
   The mission of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is to protect human health and to
     safeguard the natural environment—air, water, and land—upon which life depends.
                                                                                              J
 EPA's purpose is to ensure that:

 All Americans are protected from significant risks to human health and the environment where they live,
 learn and work.

 National efforts to reduce environmental risk are based on the best available scientific information.

 Federal laws protecting human health and the environment are enforced fairly and effectively.

 Environmental protection is an integral consideration in U.S. policies concerning natural resources, human
 health, economic growth, energy, transportation, agriculture, industry, and international trade; and these
 factors are similarly considered in establishing environmental policy.

 All parts of society—communities, individuals, business, state and local governments, tribal governments—
 have access to accurate information  sufficient to effectively participate in managing human health and
 environmental risks.

 Environmental protection contributes to making our communities and ecosystems diverse,  sustainable
 and economically productive.

 The United States plays a leadership role in working with other nations to protect the global environment.
                                                                                              J
                                 STRATEGIC GOALS
  1.  Clean Air
  2.  Clean and Safe Water
  3.  Safe Food
  4.  Preventing Pollution and Reducing Risk in Communities, Homes, Workplaces, and  Ecosystems
  5.  Better Waste Management, Restoration of Contaminated Waste Sites, and Emergency Response
  6.  Reduction of Global and Cross-Border Environmental Risks
  7.  Expansion of Americans'  Right-to-Know About Their Environment
  8.  Sound Science, Improved Understanding of Environmental Risk, and Greater Innovation to Address
     Environmental Problems
  9.  A Credible Deterrent to Pollution and Greater Compliance with the Law
 10.  Effective Management
k Reflects 1997 Strategic Plan goal language, under which FY 2000 performance was conducted. Goal language has since been updated.

-------
                    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                                  WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                                                                             THE ADMINISTRATOR

                                      March 1, 2001
The President
The White House
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

       I am pleased to present the Environmental Protection Agency's Fiscal Year 2000 Annual
Report. Under the authority of the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000, this report consolidates
several reports to provide a comprehensive look at EPA's programmatic, managerial, and
financial activities over the past fiscal year. This report meets the requirements of the
Government Performance and Results Act, the Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act, the
Agency portion of the Inspector General Act Amendments, the Government Management
Reform Act, and the Chief Financial Officers Act.

       Over the past three decades, our nation has realized tremendous progress in our common
mission to preserve and protect our environment and the health of all Americans. Today,
millions of Americans are breathing cleaner air, drinking safer water, eating food that is free from
pesticide residues, and are living in communities that are protected from toxic chemicals.  We
have seen that environmental protection and economic prosperity can and do go hand-in-hand.

       Building upon the progress we have made, we are now ready to enter a new era of
environmental policy—an era that requires a new philosophy of public and private stewardship
and accountability. In the years ahead, EPA will work to advance our nation's environmental
protection goals by enhancing cooperation among all stakeholders. We are committed to forging
stronger partnerships among citizens, government, and business that are built on trust,
cooperation, and shared goals to achieve measurable results.  We will work closely with our
federal, state, tribal, and community partners to profit from their expertise  and unique experience
to provide the flexibility needed to develop innovative and workable solutions to environmental
problems. To meet and exceed our shared goals, we will place greater emphasis on market and
incentive-based solutions such as emissions trading. We will base our policies and decisions on
sound science and meaningful peer review. Finally, we will work to promote compliance with
environmental standards and to fulfill our responsibility to the American people for enforcing
environmental laws and regulations.
                               Internet Address (URL)» http://www.epa.gov
             Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 25% Postconsumer)

-------
       The information provided in this report will help us assess the progress we have made
thus far, determine our priorities and goals for the coming years, and ensure sound planning and
budgeting decisions to address the challenges that lie ahead. We look forward to working with
all Americans—citizens, government, business, the scientific community—in a commitment to
achieving a safe and healthy environment for ourselves, our children, and the generations to
come.

                                         Sincerely yours,
                                         Christine Todd Whitman

Enclosure

-------
                           EPA'S FY 2000 ANNUAL REPORT

                                  TABLE OF CONTENTS



Mission Statement - Strategic Goals 	Inside Front Cover

Christine Todd Whitman's Letter to the President	Feature

Table of Contents	i

Preface	iii

Three Decades of Environmental Accomplishments	v

SECTION I - Overview and Analysis                                                        1-1 -1-12

SECTION II - Performance Results
     Goall: Clean Air	II-l
         Table of Results	II-8
     Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water	11-13
         Table of Results	11-23
     Goal 3: Safe Food	11-29
         Table of Results	11-34
     Goal 4: Preventing Pollution and Reducing Risk	11-37
         Table of Results	11-44
     Goal 5: Waste Management	11-49
         Table of Results	11-56
     Goal 6: Reduction of Global and Cross-Border Risks	11-63
         Table of Results	11-69
     Goal?: Right-to-Know	11-75
         Table of Results	11-81
     Goal 8: Sound Science	11-85
         Table of Results	11-90
     Goal 9: Credible Deterrent and Greater Compliance	11-93
         Table of Results	11-98
     Goal 10: Effective Management	11-103
         Table of Results	11-109

SECTION III - Management Accomplishments and Challenges                             III-l -111-20

     Integrity Act Report	III-2

     Major Management Challenges	III-4

     Report on Audits	111-10

     Major Management Challenges Needing High-Level Agency Attention (OIG)	111-13

     Key Management Challenges and Significant Agency Progress Towards Their Resolution (OIG) .... 111-19
                                                                               EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
SECTION IV - FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements                                       IV-1 - IV-72



     Message from the Deputy Chief Financial Officer	IV-3



     Chief Financial Officer's Analysis	IV-5



     Principal Financial Statements	IV-11



     OIG's Report on EPA's FY 2000 Financial Statements	IV-61






Appendix



     EPA Organization Chart	Appendix A



     List of Acronyms	  Appendix B






Public Access to EPA's Programs via http://www.epa.gov	Inside Back Cover



Photo Acknowledgments	Back Cover
      EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
                                     PREFACE

     The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has prepared the following report to present
a comprehensive picture of the Agency's performance during fiscal year (FY) 2000. Unlike EPAs
Fiscal Year 1999 Annual Performance Report, which was designed specifically to meet the requirements
of the Government Performance  and Results Act (GPRA), the Fiscal Year 2000 Annual Report
addresses reporting requirements under GPRA as well as under several other management statutes—
the Federal  Managers Financial Integrity Act, the Inspector General Act Amendments, the
Government Management Reform Act, and the Chief Financial Officers Act—as allowed by the
Reports Consolidation Act of 2000. Therefore, this consolidated annual report not only represents
a step toward the government-wide goal  of  streamlining management reporting but also allows
the Agency to present to Congress and the American public a fuller, more comprehensive picture
of its FY 2000 progress and accomplishments, both programmatic and financial.

     Taken as a whole, the sections that follow summarize the progress EPA and its federal, state,
tribal, and local government partners have made over the past year toward ensuring a clean, healthy
environment for  all Americans and explain how the Agency has used taxpayers' dollars effectively
and responsibly to do so.  Section  I provides a general overview  of EPAs performance during
FY 2000, in  terms of both the Agency's  environmental and human health protection initiatives
and its management  and financial activities. This "Overview and Analysis" highlights  selected
accomplishments, summarizes the insights EPA managers have gained from their review of FY 2000
performance, and discusses how the lessons the Agency has learned from its experience in FY 2000
might be applied to improve performance in FY 2001 and beyond.

     Section II,  "GPRA Performance Results," reviews the results EPA  and its partners have
achieved under the Agency's FY 2000 annual performance goals. It also provides some additional
FY 1999 performance data to supplement the information contained in the FiscalYear 1999'Annual
Performance Report. This section describes  EPAs accomplishments  and successes, and it explores
those areas in which the Agency was unable to achieve the goals it had set for the year. EPA will use
these performance measurement results  to ensure that its environmental protection programs
work as intended and to make adjustments and corrections to improve future performance.

     The third and fourth sections of the report, "Management Accomplishments and Challenges"
and "FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements," focus on how EPA manages its programs and activities
and applies its resources to achieve environmental results. Section III discusses management integrity
issues and management challenges and describes the results of the Agency's audit follow-up activities.
Finally, Section IV includes EPAs FY 2000 annual  financial statements, along with a message  and
analysis from EPA's Deputy Chief Financial Officer, supplemental information, and the Office of
Inspector General Report.
                                                                           EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
            THREE DECADES OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRESS

1970
   •   Twenty million people celebrate the first Earth Day.
   •   President Richard Nixon creates EPA with a mission to protect the environment and human
       health. The Agency is formed from parts of the Department of the Interior; the Department of
       Health, Education, and Welfare; the Department of Agriculture; the Atomic Energy Commission;
       the Federal Radiation Council; and the Council on Environmental Quality.
   •   Congress amends the Clean Air Act to set national air quality, auto emission, and anti-pollution
       standards.
1971
   •   Congress restricts use of lead-based paint in residences  and on cribs and toys. (Lead-Based
       Paint Poisoning Prevention Act)
1972
   •   EPA bans dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), a cancer-causing pesticide.
   •   The United States and Canada agree to clean up the Great Lakes, which contain 95 percent of
       America's fresh water and as of 2000 supply drinking water for 25 million people.
   •   EPA embarks on a major national commitment to build an advanced network of sewage
       treatment facilities to limit raw sewage flowing into rivers, lakes, and streams. (Federal Water
       Pollution Control Act)
   •   Congress requires more robust health and safety reviews of pesticides based on scientific
       evaluations. (Under amendments to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act)
1973
   •   EPA begins phasing out lead in gasoline.
   •   EPA issues the first permit limiting a factory's polluted discharges into waterways. EPA now
       regulates water pollution from 45,000 industrial facilities, preventing one  billion pounds of toxics
       from entering waterways each year.  (Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of
       1972 regulating point source dischargers)
1974
   •   EPA is  authorized to regulate the quality and safety of the public drinking water supply, including
       requirements for physical and chemical treatment  of drinking water. (Safe Drinking Water Act)
1975
   •   Congress establishes  fuel economy standards and  EPA sets tailpipe emission standards for cars.
1976
   •   President Gerald Ford signs the Toxic Substances Control Act which authorizes EPA to track
       industrial chemicals produced or imported into the United States.
   •   EPA begins phaseout of cancer-causing polychlorinated biphenyl  (PCB) production and use.
   •   Congress passes the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, regulating hazardous waste
       from its production to its disposal and providing incentives for recovery of valuable resources
       from solid waste.
                                                                            EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
1977
    •   President Jimmy Carter signs the Clean Air Act Amendments.
    •   Congress passes the Clean Water Act, the result of amendments to the Federal Water Pollution
       Control Act of 1972 with a focus on toxic pollutants.
1978
    •   Residents discover that Love Canal, New York, is contaminated by buried leaking chemical
       containers. The cleanup is completed through the Superfund Program in 1989, and the area is
       proclaimed habitable.
    •   EPA demonstrates scrubber technology for removing air pollution from coal-fired power plants.

1979
    •   EPA bans two herbicides containing dioxins, chemical compounds that are by-products of certain
       industrial activities that cause cancer and other adverse health effects.
1980
    •   Congress creates Superfund (through the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
       Compensation, and Liability Act) to clean up abandoned hazardous waste sites.
1981
    •   EPA issues its first hazardous waste storage permit under the Resource Conservation and
       Recovery Act.
1982
    •   Dioxin contamination forces the government to purchase homes in Times Beach, Missouri. The
       federal government  and the responsible polluters share the costs of cleanups. By 1997 dioxin-
       contaminated soil and debris at Times Beach and 27 related sites in Eastern Missouri had been
       safely excavated and incinerated.
    •   A PCB landfill protest in North Carolina begins the environmental justice movement.
1983
    •   Cleanup actions begin to rid the Chesapeake Bay of pollution stemming from  sewage treatment
       plants, urban runoff, and farm waste.
    •   EPA encourages homeowners to test for radon gas, which is a leading cause of lung cancer.
    •   EPA issues the first  Superfund National Priorities List, containing 406 sites nationwide.
1984
    •   Amendments to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act require  EPA to issue regulations
       for and to establish  a program to control underground tanks containing petroleum, hazardous
       wastes, and other designated  substances. (The Federal Hazardous and Solid Waste
       Amendments)
    •   EPA adopts the Indian Policy to explicitly address the role of tribes in environmental
       management. As of 2000, five of EPAs statutes specifically allow for EPA authorization of tribal
       programs or a substantial role for tribes.
1985
    •   Scientists report that a giant hole in the earth's ozone layer opens each spring over Antarctica.
    •   EPA joins an international convention in Vienna calling for worldwide cooperative efforts to
       eliminate use of substances that deplete the ozone layer.

 EPAs FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
1986
    •   Congress declares the public has a right to know when toxic chemicals are released into air, land,
       and water with the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act.
    •   President Ronald Reagan signs the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, thereby
       increasing the size of the trust fund to $8.5 billion, stressing permanent remedies, and increasing
       state involvement.
    •   Congress passes the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act, and the Asbestos  in Schools
       Program, protecting workers, the public, and children from exposure to asbestos.
    •   President Reagan signs Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments.
1987
    •   The United States and 28 other nations sign the Montreal Protocol, pledging to phase  out
       production of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), a primary cause of stratospheric ozone depletion.
    •   EPA implements the National Estuary Program, bringing together federal, state, and local agencies
       to restore and protect estuaries serving as habitats and nursery grounds for two-thirds  of the
       nation's commercial fish and shellfish.
1988
    •   Congress bans ocean dumping of  sewage sludge and industrial waste. (Ocean Dumping Ban Act)
    •   The Gulf of Mexico Program is established as a community-based, citizen-led program for the
       Gulf region.
    •   Congress accelerates the reregistration process for previously registered pesticides and authorizes
       the collection of fees to support reregistration activities. (Under amendments to the Federal
       Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act)
1989
    •   The Exxon Valde^ spills 11 million gallons of crude oil in Alaska's Prince William  Sound. Exxon is
       fined $1 billion, the largest criminal environmental damage settlement in history.
    •   EPA makes publicly available the first annual community right-to-know information on the
       location and nature of toxic chemical releases in  communities around the country, through the new
       Toxics Release Inventory Program.
1990
    •   President George Bush signs the Clean Air Act Amendments, which contain innovative
       approaches to pollution control and the promise of a renewed national commitment to
       environmental protection.
    •   Reducing Risk, a landmark report from EPA's Science Advisory Board, calls for the setting of
       national environmental priorities and greater use of science in decision-making on environmental
       regulation.
    •   President George Bush signs the Pollution Prevention Act, emphasizing the  importance of
       preventing—not just correcting—environmental damage.
1991
    •   Under EPA's coordination, all federal agencies begin using recyclable and recycled content products
       whenever possible.
    •   EPA launches Green Lights®, a voluntary program to encourage corporations, government
       agencies, and other institutions to install energy-efficient lighting.

                                                                                                 ^
                                                                               EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
1992
    •   EPA signs partnership agreements with eight leading computer manufacturers to promote energy-
       efficient personal computers and prevent air pollution associated with power generation through
       the Energy Star Program.
    •   Congress  passes the Indian Environmental General Assistance Program Act. This legislation
       allows EPA to assist tribes in planning, developing, or establishing environmental protection
       programs through the administration of grants.
    •   EPA establishes a network of Environmental Finance Centers through cooperative agreements
       with universities. The Environmental Finance Center Network now consists of nine centers that
       assist customers in 40 states on such issues as rate setting, capacity development, brownfields
       redevelopment, affordability strategies, asset management, and capital budgeting.
1993
    •   EPA reports secondhand smoke contaminates indoor air, posing serious health risks to
       nonsmokers.
    •   EPA announces the Common Sense Initiative, an effort to shift environmental regulation to a
       sector-based approach.
1994
    •   EPA launches its Brownfields Program to facilitate the cleanup of abandoned, contaminated sites
       for productive use.
    •   The Tribal Caucus of the Tribal Operations Committee is established to improve communication
       and build stronger partnerships with the Agency.
1995
    •   EPA launches an incentive-based acid rain program to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions. Within
       2 years, researchers report unprecedented reductions in acid rain.
    •   The National Environmental Performance Partnership System  (NEPPS) gives states, and EPA a
       more flexible process  for setting priorities, clarifying responsibilities, and making the most effective
       use of taxpayer dollars.
    •   Project XL (eXcellence and Leadership)  is introduced. Under this initiative, companies, facilities,
       states, and localities develop innovative ways to achieve results that go beyond those required by
       environmental regulations.
1996
    •   Congress  enacts the amendments  to the  Safe Drinking Water Act. The amendments emphasize
       sound science and risk-based standard setting, small water supply system flexibility and technical
       assistance, community-empowered source water assessment and protection, public right-to-know,
       and water system infrastructure assistance through a multibillion-dollar state revolving loan fund.
    •   The Grand Canyon Transport Visibility Commission—consisting of states, tribes, and federal
       agencies (e.g., EPA and the  Department  of the Interior)—agree to improve visibility at the canyon,
       working with public interest and business groups.
    •   Congress  establishes a health-based standard for pesticides used on  food crops, with added
       protections for infants and children. (Food Quality Protection Act)
  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
1997
    •   An Executive Order is issued to protect children from environmental health risks, including
       childhood asthma and lead poisoning. EPA provides tips to help parents protect their children
       from environmental factors that can trigger asthma attacks.
    •   The United States and Canada sign an unprecedented agreement (the Binational Toxics Strategy)
       to essentially eliminate toxic substances from the Great Lakes.
1998
    •   EPA requires states to reduce nitrogen oxide  (NOJ emissions to reduce smog in the eastern
       United States. EPA encourages states to use an emission trading program called "cap and trade,"
       which allows industries greater flexibility in choosing pollution controls because they can buy
       and sell market-based "credits" to reduce their NO emissions.
1999
2000
       EPA issues new emissions standards for cars, sport utility vehicles (SUVs), minivans, and trucks,
       requiring them to be 77 percent to 95 percent cleaner starting with model year 2004.
       Marking the 30th anniversary of Earth Day, the Agency launches its new Internet home page at
       http://www.epa.gov, making environmental information more accessible to the tens of
       millions of visitors who visit the site each month. As part of the Earth Day-related launch, EPA
       regional offices around the country release reports detailing  environmental progress and public
       health protection achieved over the past 30 years.
                                                                                 EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
          FY2000
ANNUAL REPORT
      OVERVIEW
   AND ANALYSIS
         SECTION I
                       *

-------
                                  OVERVIEW AND ANALYSIS
INTRODUCTION

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
leads the nation's efforts to safeguard the natural
environment and protect human health. The Agency is
committed to ensuring that the American  public has
air that is safe to breathe, water that is clean  and safe to
drink, food that is  free  from dangerous pesticide
residues, and communities that are protected from toxic
chemicals. To accomplish this mission EPA set ten
long-term strategic goals that identify the environmental
outcomes or results  the Agency is  working to attain
and the sound financial and management practices it
intends  to employ. Each year,  as required under the
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA),
EPA prepares an annual plan that translates the Agency's
long-term goals and objectives into  specific actions to
be conducted and resources to be allocated for the fiscal
year. EPA is accountable to the American public  for
achieving these annual performance goals for the
protection of the environment and human health and
for using taxpayers' dollars efficiently and effectively
to do so.
    A central purpose of GPRA is to gain better results
from government programs  by requiring federal
agencies to define their performance goals and holding
them accountable for achieving these goals. Successfully
managing for results depends, in part, on strong links
between annual and longer-term planning,  budgeting,
financial accounting, and performance results. EPA has
gone farther  than most other federal agencies in
structuring its  1997 and 2000 revised Strategic Plans to
reflect the full scope of the Agency's resources and
workforce and in restructuring its budget to mirror its
strategic goals and objectives.  Under this approach
EPA's strategic  goals include both environmentally
oriented goals, such as Clean Air and Safe  Water, and
functional goals, such as Sound Science and Effective
Management,  that are critical to the achievement of
these environmental  and human health outcomes.
    In a further step to promote accountability, this
report  includes the Agency's audited financial
statements, an independently reviewed accounting of
expenditures  to demonstrate  that  EPA has sound
financial management practices in place. These financial
reports  provide not only the assurance that EPA is
managing its resources soundly and efficiently, but also
information needed to ensure that EPA  uses its
resources  strategically  and effectively to  achieve
environmental goals.
    Linking planning, budgeting, financial accounting,
and performance assessment helps EPA focus  resource
allocation decisions on the  environmental and human
health results to be achieved, provides longer-term
perspective and continuity for budgeting, and reinforces
the importance of financial stewardship and fiscal
integrity in achieving the Agency's mission. As a result
EPA can demonstrate to Congress and the public how
taxpayers' dollars are applied across the Agency's
strategic goals and how they support the achievement
of results.

    EPA's Fiscal Year 2000 Annual Report serves several
purposes. First it describes the progress  that EPA,
workingwith its federal, state, tribal, and local government
partners, made toward the  annual performance goals
established in  the Agency's Fiscal Year  (FY) 2000
Annual Plan. Next  it presents major management
accomplishments and challenges EPA faced during the
year and discusses Agency approaches and solutions.
Finally  it summarizes EPA's financial activities  and
achievements. As a whole the AnnualReportprovides an
opportunity for the Agency to review its performance,
highlight particularly noteworthy accomplishments,
examine causes for missed  goals or targets, and, most
importantly, reflect on how EPA's experience in  FY 2000
can shape efforts to achieve the Agency's strategic goals
and objectives in the coming years.
    This "Overview and Analysis" (which addresses
requirements for a "Management's Discussion  and
Analysis" of the audited  financial  statements
component of the Fiscal Year 2000 Annual Report)1 is
intended to provide  a "big picture" view of EPA's
performance and fiscal accountability over the year. In
particular it describes the  results achieved under the
Agency's goals  and objectives, reviews EPA's  financial
accomplishments, and summarizes actions EPA has
taken or plans to take to address management problems.
In addition it discusses significant factors  that might
1 Because the Fiscal Year 2000 Annual Report consolidates a number of specific reports,
 several components of the ''Management's Discussion and Analysis" are presented in
 greater detail elsewhere in this report. In particular EPA's mission statement and long-
 range goals appear at the front of the report, and an EPA organization chart is included
 as Appendix A. For a discussion of the Agency's performance goals, objectives, and
 results, see Section II. Management accomplishments and challenges are discussed in
 Section III. Financial statements, along with a discussion of systems, controls, and legal
 compliance, are presented in Section IV.
                                                                                        Overview and Analysis
                                                                                                           1-1

-------
    affect future Agency operations. This  section  is
    supplemented   and  supported by  the  more
    comprehensive, detailed information provided in the
    remaining sections of the FiscalYear2000 AnnualReport.
    Summary of Performance Results

        During FY 2000 EPA and its  partners made
    significant contributions to the establishment of a
    cleaner, healthier environment. As illustrated by the
    performance highlights that follow, in FY 2000 at least
    91  percent of the American public  served  by
    community water systems received water meeting all
    health-based drinking water standards in  effect since
    1994. More  of the American public breathed cleaner
    air, the result of significant reductions in harmful air
    pollutants. Food was safer, due to reduced use of high-
    risk pesticides and registration of reduced-risk pesticide
    ingredients. Completed construction at Superfund sites
    and cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields sites
    resulted in cleaner, safer, and healthier communities.

        In FY 2000 EPA met 80 percent (51) of the 64
    annual performance goals (APGs) for which data are
    provided in this report.2 EPA also made significant
    progress toward the 13 APGs that were not achieved
    in FY 2000, and for these APGs the Agency is on track
    to meet its long-term goals and objectives.

        During FY 2000 new performance data also
    became available for several of the 13 FY 1999 APGs
    for which there were delayed reporting cycles or targets
    set beyond FY 1999.  For example, an  additional
    1.3 million people are living in residences with healthier
    indoor air. EPA also exceeded, by over 20 percent, its
    goal of documenting  that controls are  in place at
    hazardous waste  facilities, helping to  ensure that
    communities are protected from harmful pollutants. In
    summary EPA can now report achievement of
    81 percent (50) of the 62 APGs for which the Agency
    has FY 1999 performance  data. Delays  in reporting
    cycles and targets set beyond FY 1999 continue to affect
    seven FY 1999 APGs.

        Tables presenting EPAs detailed FY 2000 APG
    results are included in Section II  at the end of each
    goal chapter. EPA continues to improve its performance
    2 EPA committed to a total of 73 APGs in its FY 2000 Annual Plan. Data for eight of
     these APGs will not be available until FY 2001 and beyond, and one APG has a target
     year that falls beyond FY 2000.
measurement capabilities and will modify some APGs
in FY 2001 and FY 2002 to reflect more outcome-
oriented measures and better performance data.

Highlights of FY 2000 Performance

    EPAs  FY 2000 accomplishments reflect a variety of
activities and initiatives. They represent progress made
toward achieving the  Agency's  strategic goals;
accomplishments that cut across individual goals, programs,
or media; and achievements in financial management.

Accomplishments Under  Strategic Goals

•   EPA issued a final rule for passenger  vehicles
    (including sport utility vehicles) that will significantly
    reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides  (NOx), a
    primary contributor to urban smog, by nearly
    3 million tons per year by 2030. (Goal 1)

•   EPA issued three final Maximum Achievable Control
    Technology (MACT) standards and proposed eight
    new standards that,  when fully implemented, will
    reduce hazardous air emissions by an estimated
    62,000 tons each  year. Combined, all the MACT
    standards issued to date will reduce emissions by
    more than 1.5 million tons each year. (Goal 1)

•   Phase II of the Acid Rain Program, which began
    in 2000, now requires reductions in sulfur dioxide
    (SO^ emissions from more than 2,500 electric utility
    units  (gas-fired,  oil-fired, and coal-fired)  and
    reductions in  year-round NO  emissions from
                  •*               X
    approximately 750 coal-fired units. (Goal 1)

•   Ninety-one percent  of the  population served by
    community drinking water systems  received
    drinking water meeting all health-based standards
    that were in effect as of 1994, up from 83 percent
    since that time. (Goal 2)

•   For the first time approximately 253 million Americans
    have access to annual consumer confidence reports
    on the quality and safety of their drinking water, as a
    result of the new Consumer Confidence Report rule.
    More than 100 million Americans are able to read
    their water quality reports online. (Goal 2)

•   Implementation  of Clean Water Action  Plan
    activities   resulted  in  the  environmental
    improvement projects now under way in 324 high-
    priority watersheds. (Goal 2)

•   Another two million people received the benefits
    of  secondary treatment of wastewater  in 2000,
1-2

-------
bringing the  total number of people served by
secondary wastewater treatment facilities to 181
million and achieving secondary treatment or better
for nearly all of the population served by publicly
owned treatment works. (Goal 2)

EPA registered 16 reduced-risk pesticide active
ingredients and reviewed 1,838 new chemical pre-
manufacture notices for hazards to human health
and the environment. (Goals 3 and 4)

EPA reassessed 121 pesticide tolerances to ensure
they met the Food  Quality Protection  Act-
mandated standard of  a "reasonable certainty of
no harm." (Goal 3)

EPA implemented various risk-reduction steps such
as restricting use, lowering or revoking tolerance
levels, and phasing out or canceling certain uses
for the  pesticides azinphos methyl,  methyl
parathion, and chlorpyrifos. (Goal 3)

Four hundred sixty-nine companies have committed
to make screening-level hazard data on approximately
2,155 chemicals available by 2005. (Goal 4)

Since the Superfund  program began, EPA has
completed construction at 757 private and federally
owned  sites  to protect human health and the
environment. During FY 2000  the  Agency
exceeded its target for Superfund constructions
completed. (Goal 5)

Through the  third quarter of  FY 2000 EPAs
Brownfields  Program  provided grants  to
communities  and states, leveraging $2.8 billion in
cleanup and redevelopment funds, generating an
estimated 7,400 jobs  benefitting disadvantaged
communities, and funding more than 2,000 site
assessments of potentially contaminated sites. The
Brownfields  Program was  named one of the ten
winners of the "Innovations in Government Awards,
2000" granted by Harvard University's John F
Kennedy School of  Government, the  Ford
Foundation, and the Council for Excellence in
Government. (Goal 5)

Availability of water and sewer services in the U.S.-
Mexican border  area has significantly improved.
Thirty-six projects  certified by  the Border
Environment Cooperation Commission are under
construction or have been  completed. (Goal 6)

Working in partnership with businesses, schools,
state  and  local governments,  and  other
    organizations, EPA is on track to meet its FY 2000
    target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from
    projected levels by more than 58 million metric tons
    of carbon equivalent. (Goal 6)

•   Reductions in domestic use of ozone-depleting
    hydrochlorofluorocarbons  and   domestic
    production and import of newly produced
    chlorofluorocarbons and halons are on track to
    meet targets set by the Clean Air Act Amendments
    for FY 2000. (Goal 6)

•   EPA demonstrated a mid-size-chassis research vehicle
    that achieved 72 miles per gallon (gasoline equivalent)
    using a state-of-the-art diesel engine and a patented,
    EPA-invented hybrid drivetrain. (Goal 8)

•   The Mid-Atlantic  Integrated Assessment
    successfully demonstrated the monitoring designs
    and indicators developed from EPAs Ecological
    Research Strategy, resulting in the first statistically
    valid assessments of  regional environmental
    conditions. (Goal 8)

•   Enforcement actions brought by EPA reduced or
    prevented the  emission  and discharge  of
    334 million pounds of pollutants and required
    treatment of an additional 1.3 billion pounds of
    contaminated soils, sediments, or water; 61 percent
    of these enforcement actions required facilities to
    improve  environmental management practices,
    which will reduce the likelihood of future violations.
    EPAs enforcement augments the efforts of states
    and tribes.  Nationally  states conduct the large
    majority  of all federally related inspections  and
    formal enforcement actions. (Goal 9)

•   During FY 2000 an additional 430 companies made
    use of EPAs audit  and self-disclosure policies,
    disclosing and correcting violations at 2,200
    facilities.  (Goal 9)

•   EPA drafted its first strategic plan for investing in
    human resources, "Strategy for Human Capital,"
    to focus management attention on human resource
    issues facing the Agency. (Goal 10)

Accomplishments Across Goals and Programs

•   The Office of  Children's  Health Protection
    developed the Children's Health Valuation Handbook
    to assist Agency economists in addressing children's
    health risks when they conduct cost-benefit analyses
    of regulatory options.
                                                                                                    1-3

-------
    •   EPA joined the Department of Housing and Urban
        Development, the Department of Health and
        Human Services, and other federal departments and
        agencies in an interagency strategy to eliminate
        childhood lead poisoning as a major public health
        problem by 2010.

    •   Two hundred twenty-eight facilities became charter
        members  of  the new National Environmental
        Performance Track Program, created to motivate
        and reward performance that exceeds federal
        environmental requirements.

    •   EPA expanded regulatory flexibility under Project
        XL (excellence  and Leadership) to identify areas
        for improving federal environmental programs and
        policies and approved an additional 35 proposals,
        bringing the  total number of projects being
        implemented to 50.

    •   To advance "smart growth" in communities, EPA
        provided funding, research, and technical assistance,
        as well as support for a national information sharing
        network.

    •   EPA created new web sites to expand public access
        to  information  about  environmental permitting
        reforms and  participation in EPA's voluntary
        partnership programs.

    •   In spring 2000 the Interagency Working Group on
        Environmental Justice released the Integrated Federal
        Interagency Environmental Justice Action Agenda  to
        ensure that coordinated federal initiatives and
        resources  are targeted to environmentally and
        economically distressed communities.

    •   EPA's  National  Environmental Justice Advisory
        Council published Environmental Justice in the
        Permitting Process. The first in a series, this report
        identifies essential factors to be considered in siting
        new pollution-generating facilities to ensure
        protection of  all citizens.

    FY 2000 Performance Issues

        Despite their best efforts, EPA and its partners were
    not able to meet all planned targets for FY 2000 APGs.
    In most cases the Agency does not expect the shortfall
    in meeting these APGs to compromise progress toward
    achieving the long-range goals and objectives.

        For example,  EPA  changed the focus  of
    underground storage tank compliance from simply
    having the required equipment to operating that
equipment properly.  As a result, states'  reporting of
compliance rates based on operational compliance led
to a lower overall compliance figure but a better measure
of environmental progress. In another case an extension
of the public comment period delayed completion of
the Exposure Factors Handbook, designed to provide
guidance for assessing risks to children exposed to
environmental contaminants, but permitted increased
public involvement. Similarly, although EPA fell well
short of its target for reassessing pesticide tolerances,
the Agency made progress in  developing a scientific
approach to assessing cumulative risk which involved
considerable stakeholder input and scientific peer
review. Once implemented this approach will expedite
Agency efforts to reassess pesticide tolerances.

    In all EPA and its partners  did not meet 13 of the
73 FY 2000 APGs. These APGs are associated with
seven of EPA's ten strategic goals. The results  tables
included in  Section  II provide more  complete
information and show that the Agency made significant
progress toward these goals.

Strengthening Program Integrity Through
Improved Management

    Over the past decade  EPA made  substantial
progress  toward resolving  programmatic and
administrative issues that had the potential to affect the
Agency's ability to achieve its mission. One of the most
significant accomplishments is the progress the Agency
has made in  addressing General Accounting Office
(GAO) concerns regarding the Superfund program. In
FY 1990 GAO designated Superfund a high-risk area,
citing recurring management problems that heightened
the risk of fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement.
After 10 years, in its January 2001 report, High-Risk
Series: An Update, GAO removed  the Superfund
program from the high-risk list, indicating that EPA
had made significant  progress in addressing this long-
standing management  challenge and  demonstrated a
continuing commitment to these efforts.

    Over the next several years EPA faces a number of
management challenges, including two that the  GAO
January 2001 high-risk update identified as government-
wide high-risk areas.  The first issue, strategic human
capital management, is characterized by what  GAO
regards as inadequate efforts  to meet  current and
emerging needs in the areas of human capital planning,
recruitment,  and development. The second  issue,
information security, was first designated a government-
1-4

-------
wide high risk area in FY 1997. Despite federal agencies'
ongoing efforts to correct security deficiencies, GAO
believes that critical government operations and assets
continue to be vulnerable.
    In its January 2001 report, Major Management
Challenges and Program Risks: Environmental Protection
Agency, GAO  identified two additional management
challenges   specific  to  EPA:   (1) improving
environmental and performance information to  set
priorities and measure results and (2) strengthening
EPAs working relationships with the states. EPAs Office
of Inspector General  (OIG) shares  GAO concerns
regarding both the high-risk issues and the management
challenges. Section II, "GPRA Performance Results,"
specifically goal  chapters 7 and  10, and Section III,
"Management Accomplishments and Challenges,"
present a further discussion of these issues.
    EPAs OIG provides Congress with an annual  list
of EPAs key management challenges  based on OIG
audits and also identifies candidate  weaknesses  for
consideration during the Agency's annual assessment of
management controls under the Federal Managers
Financial Integrity Act. Section III  includes OIG's
statement on the Agency's most serious management and
performance challenges and its assessment of Agency
progress. OIG identified several additional areas it
believes EPA should address in a timely manner to ensure
the Agency can accomplish its environmental mission
and achieve effective management. These issues include
accountability, managerial  cost accounting, quality of
laboratory data, EPAs use of assistance agreements to
accomplish its mission, the backlog of National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System Permits, and results-based
information technology  project management.  Goal
chapters 2,7, and 10 in Section II and Section III provide
further discussion of  these issues.

    Recognizing that one of the most critical challenges
facing government today is preserving the public's trust
in the integrity of government programs, EPA places a
high priority on addressing GAO and OIG issues as well
as issues identified by the Office  of Management and
Budget (OMB) and through internal Agency reviews and
assessments. Section III contains a full discussion of  the
Agency's material weaknesses  and major management
challenges and provides a summary of corrective action
strategies under way to resolve the issues. In addition to
goal chapters 2,7, and 10 identified above, goal chapters
5, 6, and 9 discuss Agency efforts to address major
management challenges that may affect the achievement
of EPAs goals and objectives.
Strengthening State and Tribal Partnerships

    Many of the advances in environmental protection
made over the past year, highlighted in  the list of
accomplishments  above and reflected in the chapters
that follow, would not have been possible without the
participation and  support of the states. EPA and the
states  consulted  extensively throughout  the
development of EPAs revised Strategic Plan, which was
issued in September 2000, and the  Agency worked
closely with members of the Environmental Council
of the States  (EGOS) to facilitate state input on the
goals, objectives, and text of the Plan.

    During FY 2000 EPA and the states continued to
strengthen their partnership to protect human health and
the environment through the National Environmental
Performance Partnership System (NEPPS). Under
NEPPS EPA and states work together closely on all
aspects of planning, priority-setting, and results-based
management, including performance measurement,
through the use of core performance measures (CPMs)
to evaluate progress toward mutual program goals. CPMs
are a limited number of program performance measures
developed by EPA and EGOS to present a meaningful
picture of each state's environmental quality and program
effectiveness. CPMs are closely aligned with EPAs GPRA
measures and similarly contain a mix of environmental
indicator, outcome, and output measures. (Those CPMs
associated with the Agency's APGs are noted in the tables
for goal chapters 1,2, and 5 in Section II of this report.)
Thirty-four states  and their EPA  regional offices
documented their partnership efforts with Performance
Partnership Agreements.

    In March 2000 EPA  formally reaffirmed  its
commitment  to the NEPPS principles of  flexibility,
innovation, and  partnership. To demonstrate this
commitment EPA designated leaders from each region
and national program office to provide  a broad, Agency-
wide perspective on how EPA and states can improve
all aspects of NEPPS. EPA also finalized new grant
regulations that lay the groundwork for negotiation of
Performance Partnership Grants (PPGs). PPGs enable
states as well as tribes  to use grant  funds  flexibly to
meet their specific environmental needs.
                                                                                                         1-5

-------
        EPA has been working  closely  with State
    Environmental Commissioners to determine how EPA
    might better incorporate state priorities into EPAs
    planning and budgeting work and improve the Agency's
    understanding of the particular environmental challenges
    facing each  state. In  spring 2000 EPA  Regional
    Administrators were asked to discuss state priorities with
    the Commissioners so that this information could inform
    the Agency's planning and budgeting work. EPA is now
    working with EGOS to develop an ongoing process to
    facilitate the receipt and consideration of state input into
    national priority-setting processes.
        Over the past 10 years GAO has worked with EPA
    and the states  to identify areas of concern, make
    recommendations, and track Agency progress in
    resolving the  long-standing challenges associated with
    the EPA-state relationship. GAO concerns  have
    centered around  some  fundamental disagreements
    between EPA and the states over respective roles,
    priorities among state environmental programs, and the
    appropriate degree of federal oversight. GAO believes
    EPA has taken positive steps in some areas that have
    improved cooperation with the states, resulting in more
    effective and  efficient environmental protection.

        EPA has  also  worked  closely  with  tribal
    governments to identify priorities for Indian country,
    to improve management of environmental issues, and
    to develop tribal capacity to implement environmental
    programs. EPA's Indian  Program involves significant
    cross-Agency and multimedia activities  designed to
    ensure  that  our  trust  responsibility to  federally
    recognized tribes is carried out. The Agency is
    committed to assuring protection of the environment
    and human health in Indian country in a manner that is
    consistent with  the government-to-government
    relationship and that conserves cultural use of natural
    resources. The new PPG regulations mentioned above
    will expand the benefits of NEPPS, enabling tribes as
    well as states to use grant funds flexibly to meet their
    specific environmental needs. During FY 2000 EPA and
    tribes also made major advances toward strengthening
    their government-to-government relationship. For
    example EPA sponsored the 5th National Tribal Annual
    Conference on Environmental Management in Lincoln
    City, Oregon. The meeting brought tribes from across
    the nation together with  a number of federal agencies
    to address a wide range of environmental issues. The
    growing partnership between tribes and  EPA was
    further demonstrated this year through the Agency's
enhanced and extensive consultation with tribes on
water quality standards in Indian country.

    EPA has also worked with tribes  to  address a
number of cross-media concerns. For example the
Agency initiated training for tribal enforcement officials
interested in obtaining or enhancing  their federal
inspection credentials. The development of  accredited
staff expands the Agency's ability to address priority
issues. In addition FY 2000 saw the creation of the first
Tribal Science Council as part  of EPA's Science
Advisory Board. This new collaborative body will enable
tribes  and EPA more effectively to address long-
standing issues in Indian country, such as the need to
further the science surrounding subsistence fishing and
other exposure pathways.

Improving Results-Based Management

    In FY 2000 EPA completed its first full planning
and accountability cycle under GPRA with the  March
2000  submission of its first Annual Performance
Report, presenting the results of EPA's FY 1999
performance to Congress and the public. In a series of
ten goal meetings, senior Agency managers met with
the Deputy Administrator to discuss the FY 1999 results
and the lessons they prompted, mid-year performance
toward FY 2000 APGs, progress toward long-term
strategic goals, and work under way to  improve
performance measurement. In addition senior managers
discussed the broader lessons learned from the Agency's
experience with GPRA implementation to date and
improvements to be made for the future. The  discussion
revealed that GPRA has had a positive impact  on the
culture of the Agency, specifically in helping managers
to define success and the results of EPA's work. The
focus on priority-setting and results has helped the
Agency relate resources to accomplishments, find new
ways to meet goals despite resource reductions, and
address important data issues and the Agency's ability
to measure results.

    To further improvements in EPA's  performance
measurement, the Agency formed a performance
measurement improvement team that conducted
workshops with program  offices  to  promote
development of more outcome-oriented  goals and
measures. EPA applied many of the lessons learned
from  this effort in developing the framework  for its
revised Strategic Plan, which was issued in September
2000. The Agency is committed to developing APGs
and performance measures that focus  on outcomes;
1-6

-------
linking performance with resources more closely; using
information generated through planning, budgeting,
analysis, and accountability activities  to inform
management decisions; and communicating the results
of its efforts clearly to Congress and the public.

Developing Program Evaluation Capabilities

    While  performance measurement  generally
describes what a program achieved—outputs  or
outcomes—during a given period, program evaluation
can help explain these results. Program evaluation
identifies areas needing improvement, better strategies
for achieving established goals, and ways  to improve
data collection or measurement  of program results.
Performance measurement alone cannot always answer
these questions.

    To further improve its ability to  assess progress,
EPA has taken steps over the past year to increase the
number and improve the quality of program evaluation
activities within the Agency. EPAs OIG has reorganized
and created an Office of Program Evaluation to
conduct evaluations of EPA's programs. During
FY 2000 EPAs Program Evaluation Network—
comprising EPA managers and staff with expertise in
and responsibilities for program evaluation—continued
to meet and to share information. In spring 2000 EPA
presented two 1-day training sessions  focusing on the
fundamentals  of   program  evaluation.   The
77 headquarters and regional staff who participated in
the training will continue to help build EPAs ability to
conduct evaluations, improving the  Agency's ability to
assess progress  toward its environmental goals.  In
FY 2000 the Agency also solicited program and regional
office proposals for limited central funding of program
evaluations.  Four studies were selected for funding,
including the Assessment of  the  Water Quality
Standards process conducted under Goal 2.
    EPA's  FY 2000  performance  data  can be
characterized as acceptably reliable and complete. In
terms of data reliability, a significant number of APGs
are Agency counts of  administrative or programmatic
outputs and are not subject to wide margins of error. In
cases where counts involve major EPA data systems,
however, the data are subject to Agency-wide data quality
standards and periodically  audited for accuracy and
completeness. The Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act Information System (RCRAInfo), for example,
adjusted the baseline number of facilities in the database
after receiving new data from authorized states, thereby
improving the reliability of the reported performance
data. Performance data for several APGs are obtained
by voluntary reporting, modeling, or extrapolating. The
degree to which the quality of the data is affected by
these data gathering techniques has not been quantified
in most cases, although the reliability of the data can be
estimated at least qualitatively. States and other external
sources provide much of the data EPA uses to develop
its performance data.  For the more  significant EPA
databases, protocols are in place to check the data for
errors. To a large degree, however, EPA must rely on the
quality assurance/quality controls in place at the primary
data source to ensure data accuracy.

    Three EPA databases have been  identified as
Agency management weaknesses in FY 2000. These are
the Permit Compliance System, RCRAInfo, and the Safe
Drinking Water Information System. The Agency is
implementing specific corrective action strategies for
each of these databases and has established milestones
for data quality improvements. As a result the quality
of the performance data from these databases can be
expected to improve significantly in the  future.

    EPA has taken several important steps to improve
its data quality management. The Agency recently
reorganized its information management activities into
one office. It has adopted six new data standards to
promote consistency in reporting and  data integration.
In addition the Agency is implementing a Central Data
Exchange—a single portal for states and the regulated
community reporting environmental information to
EPA. These steps will help to improve  the efficiency
and reliability of EPA's data as well as detect and correct
errors. In addition, with the goal of  significantly
improving data quality, EPA is allowing  greater public
access  to Agency data, including enforcement and
compliance information.

    All of the Agency's 73 FY 2000 APGs  are
accounted for in the tables of results presented in each
goal chapter in Section II. (These 73 APGs were first
reported in the FY 2000 Final Annual  Plan. They have
since been revised to reflect final budget decisions and
FY 1999 performance and presented in EPA's FY 2001
budget justification to Congress.) In the  case of APGs
for which performance data are not yet available, the
                                                                                                        1-7

-------
    tables indicate when the Agency will have the data
    necessary to report performance.

    FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

    EPA's Financial Statements

        EPA's financial statements reflect the range of the
    Agency's financial activities over the course of a fiscal
    year and present a snapshot of its financial position at
    the end of that fiscal year. They are the culmination of
    many thousands of transactions and financial records,
    and on their accuracy and reliability EPA bases its
    assurance to the public that the Agency manages
    resources efficiently, effectively, and productively. EPA's
    OIG performs an annual audit of the full set of financial
    statements to determine whether the picture they
    present is a fair and accurate one, based on generally
    accepted accounting principles.  When an agency's
    financial statements receive an unqualified or "clean"
    opinion from the auditors, this signals to the public the
    auditors' reasonable  assurance of  the agency's fiscal
    health at year's end. When auditors are unable to make
    a full assessment of financial statements because there
    are elements  they cannot evaluate, they will render a
    qualified audit opinion. In such a case, auditors report
    that the statements  represent an agency's financial
    circumstances fairly with the exception of individual
    elements that cannot be assessed. When auditors  are
    unable  to render an opinion on  a set of financial
    statements because they are unable to make any kind
    of evaluation, they typically issue a disclaimer.

        The auditors' annual check on financial management
    is fundamental to good management, and EPA
    recognizes it as an important indicator of the Agency's
    ability to account for taxpayer dollars and manage  for
    results.  EPA also  values  the resource information
    summarized in its financial statements as a basis for cost-
    benefit and trends analyses concerning the environmental
    results  envisioned in EPA's strategic goals. For these
    reasons, no annual report of EPA's accomplishments
    would be complete without the inclusion of  audited
    financial statements or some equivalent.
        In response to process control concerns raised in
    the audit of EPA's FY 1999 financial statements, the
    Office of the Chief Financial Officer has worked closely
    with OIG to strengthen Agency financial management
    processes and financial statement preparation. EPA has
    analyzed in greater detail than ever before every element
of its financial statements. EPA also framed new policies
and instituted new procedures, improved quality control
across the entire range of the financial statements, made
selective use of automation in new areas, adopted new
methodologies, and strengthened information security.
EPA is pleased to report  that this collaboration has
enabled the Agency to achieve a "clean" audit opinion
on its FY 2000 financial statements.

Budget Authority for FY 1997-FY 2000

    Budget authority is the authority provided by law
to incur financial obligations, such as awarding contracts
or grants.  For FY 2000  EPA received a total of
$8.3 billion in budget authority. The "Budget Authority
by Fiscal Year" chart provides a comparison of EPA's
total budget authority for FY 1997 through FY 2000.

    OMB issues  EPA's budget authority  in  many
accounts, consistent with  appropriation law. The
"Budget  Authority" chart  depicts the  Superfund and
State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)  accounts
and characterizes other major accounts—such  as the
Environmental Programs  and Management  account
and the Science and Technology account—under "All

          Budget Authority by Fiscal Year
                                          18.3
        1997
                   1998
                               1999
                                          2000
Other." The Superfund category is a net amount in
that it reflects transfers of Superfund authority to other
accounts as directed by Congress.

FY 2000 Obligations

   An obligation is a legal responsibility on the part
of the government to make a disbursement at a later
date. For example an obligation is recognized when the
1-8
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
 Appropriation
                                        2000 OBLIGATIONS BY GO
                                           (Dollars in Millions)
Goal!
Goal 2
GoalS
Goal 4
GoalS
GoalG
Goal 7
GoalS
GoalS
Goal 10
Reim.
Other
Total
Approp.
 STAG
                   203
                         3098
                                        94
                                               64
                                                      52
                                                                        71
                                                                                                3582
 All Other
                   340
                          526
                                  75
                                        177
                                              296
                                                     178
                                                           139
                                                                 261
                                                                       285
                                                                              381
                                                                                    270
                                                                                                2928
 Superfund
                            1563
                                                       15
                                                              57
                                                                   123
                                                                         700
                                                                               2464
 TOTAL
                   543
                         3624
                                  75
                                       271
                                             1923
                                                     230
                                                           142
                                                                 264
                                                                       371
                                                                              438
                                                                                    393
                                                                                          700
                                                                                                8974
 Approp. = Appropriation
 Reim. = Reimbursable
            STAG = State and Tribal Assistance Grants
            Other = Payment from general revenues to the Hazardous Substance Superfund
government awards  a  contract. The actual costs
associated with the contract are recognized when the
contractor delivers the requested goods or services.

    The "FY 2000 Obligations by Goal" table presents
data for each goal by appropriation. Obligations in this
table are not the same as "costs," which are reported in
Section IV under the Statement of  Net  Costs.
Obligation totals in this table also differ from Agency
financial statements because the obligation totals include
EPA's Superfund transfer to other federal agencies. Each
of the goal chapters that follow in Section II presents
the total obligations for that goal in comparison to
Agency's total obligations for FY 2000.

FY 2000 Expenses

    Expenses are EPA's costs for services rendered or
activities performed. In FY 2000 EPA spent $7.9 billion
using current and prior  year appropriation  authority.
Of this amount 75.8 percent was spent on contracts,

         FY 2000 EPA Expenses
                                   All Other
                                     8.7%
                                    inter-agency agreements (TAGs), and grants. FY 2000
                                    expenses are also displayed by strategic goal in the
                                    Statement of Net Costs in Section IV

                                    Superfund Financial Trends

                                        The Comprehensive Environmental Response,
                                    Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), enacted
                                    in 1980, formally established the Superfund Program
                                    and the Hazardous Substance Response Trust Fund,
                                    now known as the Hazardous Substance Superfund
                                    (Trust  Fund). Although  CERCLA has not been

                                             FY 2000 Superfund Trust Fund
                                                    Revenue  Sources
                                                                                Other
                                                                                0.4%
                                                                          Fines & Penalties
                                                                               0.1%
                                                      reauthorized since  1995, the Superfund Program
                                                      continues to operate each year by way of annual
                                                      Congressional  appropriations from  general  fund
                                                      transfer.
                                                                                      Overview and Analysis
                                                                                                        1-9

-------
        The Trust Fund, administered by the Bureau of
    Public Debt, U.S. Department  of the Treasury
    (Treasury), is the primary  financing source for the
    Superfund Program. For FY 2000 Treasury reports that
    the Trust Fund received approximately $1.2 billion in
    receipts  from  the  revenue sources shown in the
    accompanying chart.

        The Superfund Program's authority to tax expired
    on December 31,1995. Consequently the major revenue
    sources for the Trust Fund are cost recoveries; interest,
    fines,  and penalties; income from  Trust  Fund
    investments;  and general fund transfer.  Due to
    diminishing revenues EPA has increased its efforts to
    conserve existing Trust Fund balances and  replenish
    the Trust Fund with all eligible revenues. To accomplish
    these goals EPA has:
    •   Revised  the indirect cost rate methodology for
        Superfund cost recovery to reflect the full costs of
        Superfund cleanup.
    •   Recovered $230.4 million during FY 2000 as a result
        of accelerated efforts to pursue collection of cost
        recovery settlements and judgments.
    •   Reemphasized its "enforcement first" philosophy
        to compel Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs)
        to  clean up  contaminated sites. By having PRPs
        perform cleanups, EPA can reduce related response
        and legal enforcement costs, resulting in cost
        savings to both taxpayers and the Trust Fund.
       Cumulative Superfund Costs Recovered
                   FY 1995 - FY 2000
    3000 |-
    2500
           1995    1996   1997   1998   1999   2000
•   With direction from Treasury, diversified the Trust
    Fund's investment portfolio and returned a higher
    rate of interest to the Trust Fund.

FUTURE TRENDS

    A number of current trends will have implications
for the future  success of  EPA's programs.  Should
climate-change-driven weather extremes such as more
frequent hot, dry summers increase, attainment of air
quality standards might be more difficult despite the
full implementation of emission control plans. High
temperatures and bright sunlight, for example, could
increase the formation of ozone. Droughts and floods,
also more likely to increase with a warmer climate, could
significantly affect the success of the Agency's water
and waste programs. Floodwaters could disrupt
hazardous waste sites  and  spread animal and other
wastes. Drought conditions could preclude reliance on
dilution to improve water quality and thus threaten the
nation's water  supply. EPA and its partners have
established some pollution control strategies predicated
on fairly typical temperature and precipitation regimes;
unfortunately, those control strategies might be less
likely to succeed in  the face of increased climate and
weather extremes.
    Population  growth, along with the  attendant
development of suburban and exurban areas, also has
implications for environmental protection programs.
Sprawl increases demands on transportation and can
result in more people relying more heavily on private
vehicles. Increases in vehicle miles traveled, coupled
with the trend toward larger vehicles such as sport utility
vehicles, can contribute to increased  emissions of
conventional pollutants  and greenhouse gases like
carbon  dioxide  and might affect EPA's air program.
Apart from adding to air quality concerns, population
growth  also places increased pressure on the nation's
infrastructure for providing clean and safe water. This
concern is becoming especially apparent as  the U.S.
population grows in the  southern and  southwestern
states, which have fewer water resources  and often less
highly developed water and wastewater treatment
infrastructures than other states.

    In conjunction with the growth of  the overall
population, America's population is aging. This change
will inevitably lead to new and unexpected patterns of
1-10
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
consumption and, therefore,  to  new patterns  of
pollution. For example, greater use of medications and
other biologically active substances might affect the
environment.
    The current trend of general economic growth and
increased consumer demands will also affect the success
of  EPA's programs across all media. If domestic
manufacturing and production rise, waste streams might
continue to change  and require responses from EPA
solid and hazardous waste programs. In the absence of
cleaner processes and better controls, air  and water
emissions would tend to  increase in response  to this
growth. Larger homes  increase  energy demands and
can lead to growth in greenhouse  gas  emissions.
Changes in producer and consumer behavior are also
likely to influence the Agency's ability to achieve  its
objectives, for example, in the area of food safety.
    Several technology changes might have significant
impacts,  both positive  and  negative, on the
environment. Development and adoption of clean
technology, such as  hydrogen fuel cells, could  reduce
energy consumption and greenhouse gas  emissions.
Biotechnology, including the development of genetically
modified organisms, might yield crops that can thrive
without the use of fertilizers and pesticides. However,
researchers continue to investigate  the interaction of
genetic engineering and other technologies with
environmental factors. EPA's pesticide and industrial
chemical programs may need to respond to advances
in biotechnology.

    The  Internet and information technology are
transforming public  sector processes and the ways that
agencies interact with their  constituents and relate to
one another. Government agencies at all levels are using
technology to be more accessible, efficient, and
responsive to their constituents. Prompted  by the
expectations of a citizenry that is growing accustomed
to conducting business online, businesses  seeking to
reduce costs in a technology-driven marketplace, and
Congressional efforts  to reduce reporting burden,
agencies are using the  Internet  and information
technology to streamline processes, improve services,
and integrate information. As  e-commerce becomes
fully entrenched in the everyday lives  of the public, EPA
will need to deliver customer services  that will require
integration across multiple departments and levels of
government.
    Clearly these and  other social, economic, and
technological trends and developments will influence
the Agency's ability to achieve its goals and objectives.
    EPA learned from its  FY 1999  experience—
through both the work it  accomplished and the
challenges it faced—and has made significant progress
during FY 2000 in applying the principles of results-
based management. The Agency advanced its  efforts
to set  quantifiable, attainable goals and targets;  to
forecast external factors that might have an impact on
program planning; to measure performance  results
more precisely; and to analyze more  accurately the
relationships among costs, activities, and results.

    In setting future goals and targets EPA will focus
on delivering environmental and human  health
outcomes and developing meaningful performance
measures where possible. The Agency will strive  to
develop APGs that  reflect progress  made toward
meeting long-term goals and that are more closely linked
to environmental outcomes. For example  APGs
currently  in place under the air pollution control
program for ozone, particulate matter, and other
pollutants enable EPA and states to measure actual
improvements in air  quality, rather than progress  in
program activities such as permits issued. EPA is making
similar progress in the area of compliance and
enforcement. For example  during FY 2000 EPA
established a baseline to measure the average length of
time it takes for significant violators to  return  to
compliance or enter  into  enforceable plans and
agreements. Building on  this effort, in FY 2001 the
Agency will be able to assess its progress in decreasing
the percentage of facilities that remain in significant
noncompliance after 2 years.
    As  part  of  its  performance  assessment
improvement effort, the Agency will continue to work
with states to improve the  CPMs  that have been
negotiated through  NEPPS,  both  to  realize
improvements in its ability to measure  outcomes and
to maintain the close alignment of NEPPS and  GPRA
performance measures. EPA and states are particularly
committed to increasing significantly the ratio  of
environmental outcome to output CPMs.
                                                                                                       1-11

-------
        To measure environmental improvements  and
    assess progress accurately, EPA and its partners need
    quality environmental information and the analytical
    tools to understand it. The Agency is working to ensure
    that it keeps pace with the rapid advances in information
    technology and can meet the growing demand for
    reliable environmental information. EPA is developing
    an  Information Plan that assesses the Agency's
    environmental direction, establishes a framework for
    identifying and addressing information needs,  and
    matches information and technology resources to those
    needs. In addition the Plan will establish processes for
    addressing data needs  and identify potential data
    collection efficiencies and opportunities to leverage
    information resources. These initiatives will also support
    EPAs efforts to improve  its trend  data, so that the
    Agency may better assess  progress toward long-term
    goals and provide a context for assessing annual results.
        Collaboration with the Agency's  federal, state, and
    tribal partners and with interested stakeholders will be
    critical to the success of these efforts. EPA will continue
    to depend on strong, effective  partnerships to ensure
    progress toward the Agency's goals  for protection of
    the environment and human health.

        The chapters that follow in Section II present EPAs
    FY 2000 progress toward each of  the Agency's ten
    long-term goals. Each chapter  discusses the Agency's
    accomplishments, research contributions, and program
    evaluations, as well as the  impact of FY 2000 results
    on the FY 2001 Annual Plan. As appropriate, chapters
    also discuss  the Agency's progress in addressing
    significant management problems. Tables provided at
    the end of each chapter present information on the
    APGs that support each long-term goal. The chapters
    and tables together help to describe the results EPA
    and its federal,  state, tribal, and local agency partners
    achieved during FY 2000  and to explain how these
    results will shape the Agency's future planning  and
    performance.
1-12

-------
         FY2000
ANNUAL REPORT
  PERFORMANCE
        RESULTS
         SECTION II

-------
    Goal 1 FY 2000 Obligations
               S543M
            GOAL 1: CLEAN AIR
                              The air in every American community will be safe and healthy to
                                 breathe. In particular, children, the elderly, and people with
                            respiratory ailments will be protected from health risks of breathing
                                   polluted air.  Reducing air pollution will also protect the
                              environment, resulting in many benefits, such as restoring life in
                               damaged ecosystems and reducing health risks to those whose
     Note: EPA FY2000 Obligations
          were $8,974 million
subsistence depends directly on those ecosystems.
OVERVIEW

    Exposure to air pollution at certain  levels is
associated with numerous harmful effects to human
health, including premature death, respiratory problems,
heart and lung diseases, and cancer and other serious
health effects such as reproduction or birth defects.
Children may be at greater risk than adults because they
are more active outdoors and their lungs are still
developing. Senior citizens are  also more sensitive to
air pollution because they often have heart or lung
diseases.  EPA and its partners  have made significant
progress in protecting the health of people of all ages
by dramatically reducing air pollution from various
sources.

    Air pollution, such as acid rain, ground-level ozone,
and air toxics, can also significantly affect ecosystems.
    CLEAN AIR EFFORTS IN INDIAN COUNTRY

  EPA has built on its partnership  with tribal
  governments and has made achievements in many
  areas, including providing resources to tribes to work
  on air quality planning, management,  and  control.
  More than 100 tribes now receive  Clean  Air Act
  funding. Sixty-seven tribes are actively involved  in
  ambient monitoring, at least 30 are developing
  emissions inventories, 27 are working with  EPA on
  major source permitting, 35 are conducting education
  and outreach activities, and several  are  actively
  participating in Regional Planning Organizations  as
  they work to address regional haze. Also, in FY 2000
  the tribes, Northern Arizona University Institute for
  Tribal Environmental Professionals,  and EPA
  launched a new Tribal Air Monitoring Support Center
  in Las Vegas that will assist with building monitoring
  capacity among tribes.
                For example, EPA has estimated that ground-level
                ozone reduces agricultural and commercial forest yields
                by $500 million each year. Airborne release and
                subsequent deposition of nitrogen oxide (NOx) is one
                of the largest sources of nitrogen pollution in certain
                water bodies, such  as the Chesapeake Bay. Overly
                abundant nitrogen can cause excessive growth of algae,
                which in turn can harm fish and shellfish and reduce
                the light available to aquatic vegetation and coral reefs.

                FY 2000 PERFORMANCE

                   EPA devotes significant effort to meeting annual
                targets  that support the longer term health and
                environmental outcomes and improvements  that are
                articulated in the Clear Air goal. To achieve the goal of
                healthy clean  air,  EPA relies on the  proactive
                cooperation of federal,  state, local and tribal
                government   agencies,   industry,  non-profit
                organizations, and individuals. Success is far from
                guaranteed even with the  full participation of all
                stakeholders. Moving into the 21st century, EPA will be
                working with various stakeholders to encourage new
                ways to meet the challenges of "cross-regional" issues
                as well as to integrate programs to address holistically
                airborne pollutants.

                Reducing Emissions of Criteria Pollutants
                   Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA establishes
                National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to
                protect human health, including the  health of
                "sensitive" populations like asthmatics, children, and
                senior citizens. EPA also sets limits to  protect public
                welfare, including protecting against degradation of
                ecosystems, vegetation, crops, and materials and
                preventing visibility impairment.

                                                                                  FY 2000 GPRA Perfomance
                                                                                                       II-l

-------
        EPA has set national air quality standards  for six
    principal pollutants (referred to as criteria pollutants):
    carbon monoxide  (CO), lead  (Pb), nitrogen dioxide
    (NO^, ozone, particulate matter (PM),  and sulfur
    dioxide (SO^. Between 1970 and 1999, total emissions
    of the six principal air pollutants decreased 31 percent
    [state core performance measure (CPM) for all six
    criteria pollutants].  These improvements occurred
    simultaneously with significant increases in the nation's
    population, economic growth, and travel and are  a result
    of  effective implementation  of clean  air laws and
    regulations,  as well as enhancements in the efficiency
    of industrial technologies.

            Trends in Emission Sources and
              NAAQS Pollution Emissions
                                        U.S. Gross Domestic
                                        Product Increased 147%
                                        Vehicle Miles Traveled
                                        Increased 140%
                                        U.S. Population
                                        Increased 33%
                                        Aggregate Emissions
                                        Decreased 31%
                                        (Six Principal Pollutants)
   1970
           1980
                   1990
                           1999
        Further improvements in air quality are expected
    with the  implementation of new  regulations  for
    passenger vehicles and trucks. In FY 2000 EPA finalized
    a rule  for passenger vehicles, including  sport utility
    vehicles, that requires these vehicles to be 77 to 95
    percent cleaner for NOx (a contributor to ground level
    ozone or smog, and nitrogen deposition in water
    bodies). The rule takes effect beginningwith model year
    2004 and will reduce NOx by nearly 3 million tons per
    year by 2030. A rule for trucks, when fully implemented
    in 2030, will reduce NO emissions by 2.6 million tons
                          X           ^
    per year.
        In FY 2000 as the result of sustained improvements
    in air  quality  and the fulfillment of other  CAA
    requirements, 13 additional areas, with a population of
    5.2 million people, were found to have improved air
    quality enough to meet at least one  of the standards
    for the criteria pollutants (some  CPMs for criteria
    pollutants). Despite  this progress in air quality
    improvement, more than 62 million people  still live in
    counties with  monitored pollution levels that do not
    meet one or more national air  quality standards (this
    number does not consider the 8-hour ozone standard).
                                                  To address the persistent air pollution problems in those
                                                  areas, EPA is working with the states, tribes, and local
                                                  governments on additional strategies and has proposed
                                                  a program to control regional haze,  which is largely
                                                  caused by particulate matter.

                                                      Population in Counties with  Monitored
                                                       Levels of Pollutants Above the NAAQS
                                                         CO
                                                         Pb
                                                        NO2
                                                      03(1hr)j
                                                      03 (8 hr)
                                                  Any NAAQS
                                                      (1 hr O3)
                                                  Any NAAQS
                                                      (8 hr O3)
1991
1999
                                                                                   60      90
                                                                                  Millions of People
                                                                                                  120
                                                                                                          150
                                                     EPA and the states are continuing their multi-year
                                                  effort to address the  ozone transport problem by
                                                  moving forward with plans to reduce NOx emissions
                                                  in the eastern portion of the country. In FY 1999 EPA
                                                  finalized the "NOx  State Implementation Plan (SIP)
                                                  call," requiring states in the  eastern portion of the
                                                  United States to submit SIPs that reduce emissions of
                                                  NO . In March 2000 a decision by the U.S. Court of
                                                     X                           J
                                                  Appeals for the District of Columbia  Circuit largely
                                                  upheld the NOx SIP call, remanding only a few issues
                                                  back to EPA.  In FY 2000  EPA developed  a plan to
                                                  implement the NOx SIP call  in accordance with the
                                                  court decision. Nineteen states  and the District of
                                                  Columbia were required to submit, by October 30,2000,
                                                  plans achieving approximately 90  percent of the
                                                  emission reductions required by the original NOx SIP
                                                  call.
                                                     In  FY 2001 EPA  plans to begin the rulemaking
                                                  process on the remanded issues. Full implementation
                                                  of this  SIP  call, considering the intended  revisions,
                                                  would reduce total NO  emissions by nearly 1 million
                                                                        x           J     •>
                                                  tons  annually.  In FY 2000, as a back-up to the NOx
                                                  SIP  call, EPA granted petitions filed by four
                                                  northeastern states seeking to reduce ozone pollution
                                                  through reductions in NOx emissions from other states.
                                                  EPA is  currently awaiting  a decision from the DC.
                                                  Circuit regarding the legality of granting these petitions.
                                                  The ozone pollution reductions from these actions will
II-2
EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
provide cleaner air for more than 100 million people.
In addition, these two actions will reduce acid rain and
visibility problems. They will also protect water quality
by reducing the amount of nitrogen deposition in water
bodies.

    In FY 2000  EPA continued the litigation  on the
legality of the July  1997 ozone and fine particle
standards. The Supreme Court granted EPA's request
for review of the D.C. Circuit decision that remanded
the standards  to EPA and heard oral arguments on
November 7, 2000. The  Court is expected to decide
the case by the middle of 2001. Because of the litigation,
EPA did not take any steps to implement the  8-hour
ozone standard in FY 2000, although EPA is working
with the states to determine appropriate boundaries for
areas  that are  not attaining  the  8-hour  standard. To
ensure a minimal, federally enforceable level of human
health  protection against  ozone pollution, EPA
reinstated the pre-1997 1-hour ozone standard in the
summer of 2000.
    The litigation has not affected efforts related to
the fine particle standard. As was scheduled, EPA is
working with states to collect data from the  new fine
Particle Monitoring Network to determine fine particle
levels across the  country. EPA is also continuing its
review of the scientific studies on the health effects of
fine particles for the 5-year review of the standard that
is required by the CAA. EPA has stated that it intends
to  complete  both efforts   before  beginning
implementation of the fine particle standard.

    In FY 2000 EPA also conducted various  planning
activities to support implementation of the regional
haze rule by the  states and tribes. The first state plans
for reducing regional haze are due in the 2003 to 2008
time frame with full implementation expected by 2018.
Regional haze, due to the presence of fine particles in
air  that scatter and  absorb  light effectively, impairs
visibility over a large area. The Agency's activities include
developing technical tools and guidance, expanding the
Interagency  Monitoring  of Protected Visual
Environments visibility monitoring network, providing
funding and developing work plans for five regional
planning bodies, and conducting specific work with the
Western Regional Air Partnership on an annex to the
recommendations of the Grand Canyon Visibility
Transport Commission. These activities will help states
achieve  the national visibility goal Congress established
when it amended the CAA in 1977.
Monitoring and Controlling Air Toxics

    Toxic air pollutants are those pollutants that cause
or might cause cancer or other serious health effects,
such as reproductive effects or birth defects, or adverse
environmental and ecological effects. Some common
toxic  air pollutants  are benzene (found in gasoline),
perchloroethylene (emitted  from some dry cleaning
facilities), and methylene chloride (used as a solvent in
some industries). Most air toxics originate  from man-
made sources, including mobile sources  (e.g., cars,
trucks,  buses, construction equipment),  stationary
sources (e.g., factories, refineries, power plants), and
indoor  sources (e.g., building materials  and  some
cleaning compounds). Air toxics are also released from
natural sources like volcanic eruptions and forest fires.
    Unlike the criteria pollutant program, an extensive
nationwide monitoring network for air toxics does not
yet exist. In FY 1999, however, EPA, with the assistance
of state and local co-regulators, began developing a
national strategy for monitoring toxic air pollutants. The
Agency is  beginning  to  implement  that  strategy.
Specifically in FY 2000 EPA, the states, tribes, and local
governments worked to develop criteria for monitoring
and analyzing ambient air toxics. In addition four urban
area pilot projects—Providence, Detroit, Tampa, and
Seattle—were  funded and they are expected to operate
for 1 year. Six small city/rural pilot projects will also be
established. This pilot phase, which was reviewed by
the Agency's Science Advisory Board, is part of a larger,
multiyear program to be used to generate information
on the variability of ambient air toxics over time and
geographic areas to guide the proper deployment of
an air toxics monitoring network.

    In addition the Agency is conducting a four-step
National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment, as part of  the
Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy, that will focus
on the 33 air toxics that present the greatest threat to
human  health in the largest number of urban areas.
The assessment results can then be used to identify the
areas  of the country and pollutants for which further
investigation is needed. The first two steps, completed
in FY 2000, were to compile a national inventory of
air toxics emissions from outdoor  sources and  to
estimate ambient concentrations of air toxics across
the contiguous United States using data from 1996. The
last two steps, to be completed in early 2001 for peer
review, are to estimate population exposures across the
contiguous United States and to characterize potential
$
e.
                                                                                    FY 2000 GPRA Perfomance
                                                                                                         II-3

-------
    human health risk due to inhalation of air toxics,
    including both cancer and noncancer effects.

        EPA has put in place important controls covering
    air toxics from fuels  and engines and is continuing to
    take additional steps to reduce air toxics from vehicles.
    EPA anticipates that by 2020 there will be a 75 percent
    emissions reduction in  key air toxics from highway
    vehicles from 1990 levels. In particular in FY 2000 the
    Agency finalized the rule that sets the standards for the
    next generation of cleaner-burning engines and gasoline
    for passenger vehicles, including sport utility vehicles,
    and finalized a similar rule for cleaner heavy-duty trucks
    and buses and their fuel. EPA also introduced a
    voluntary diesel retrofit program that encourages states,
    cities, and private companies to use modern emissions
    control technology on their older diesel engines, which
    can remain operable for 20 to 25 years. Two pilot retrofit
    projects are under way in Seattle and Washington, DC,
    and three more projects are planned. In addition to
    reducing air toxics,  these regulatory and  voluntary
    efforts will also reduce criteria pollutants.

        Another program, the reformulated gasoline (RFG)
    program is helping to  reduce  pollution in the
    metropolitan areas of the country with the most difficult
    air quality problems. In 1995 EPA began work with the
    states to implement a two phased RFG program using
    gasoline blends to burn fuel more cleanly. During Phase
    I, which ended in 1999, emissions of benzene (a known
    human carcinogen) were reduced in major metropolitan
    areas by as much as 43 percent. Phase II, which began
    on January 1,2000, should reduce vehicle emissions of
    volatile organic compounds by 27 percent, air toxics
    emissions by 22 percent, and NO emissions by seven
    percent (http://www.epa.gov/oms/). Phase II will
    also reduce toxic emissions by about 24,000 tons per
    year in RFG areas, equivalent to eliminating the toxic
    emissions from more than 13 million vehicles. EPA
    estimates that the Phase I and Phase II RFG program
    will reduce smog pollutants by 105,000 tons per year,
    equivalent to eliminating the smog-forming emissions
    from more than 16 million vehicles. About 75 million
    people in 17 states are breathing cleaner air because of
    the RFG program.

        EPA is nearing the end of  the first phase  of the
    two-phase process for regulating stationary source  air
    toxic emissions that Congress established in the 1990
    Amendments. In the  first phase, air toxic emissions are
    to be reduced by requiring industry to do what is doable:
  In a program that combines EPA's commitment to
  accurate, timely environmental information with
  cutting edge technology, AIRNOW displays the smog
  levels throughout the day and tracks changes hour by
  hour. AIRNOW presents the information in easy-to-
  understand maps. "Real-time" data are available for
  35 states and Washington DC. Air pollution forecasts
  for 135 cities appear in USA Today and on the Weather
  Channel. The goals of EPA's AIRNOW web site are
  to (1) provide real-time  air pollution data in an
  understandable, visual format; (2) provide information
  about health and environmental effects of air pollution;
  (3) provide the public with  information about ways in
  which they can protect their health and actions  they
  can take to reduce pollution (http://www.epa.gov/
  airnow).
          National Air Quality Maps
     August 16, 2000 and August 17, 2000
EPA was required to set industry-wide standards based
on pollution control equipment that is already in use.
In FY 2000 the  Agency proposed eight of these
Maximum Achievable  Control Technology  (MACT)
standards covering 12 types of emission sources. The
Agency also issued three final MACT standards for four
source  categories. These rules will  reduce toxic
emissions by an estimated 62,000 tons each year when
fully implemented; together, once fully implemented,
the toxics standards issued over the past 10 years will
cut emissions of toxic air pollutants by nearly 1.5 million
II-4
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
  tons per year. EPA is also beginning the second phase
  of the two-phase process — determining whether there
  are remaining risks that require additional controls. In
  FY 2000  the Agency  conducted  12  screening  risk
  assessments on previously promulgated 2- and 4-year
  MACT standards and concluded that  four source
  categories will need further assessments to determine
  whether additional regulations are needed. In December
  2000 EPA issued a finding that mercury emitted from
  power plants is a human health concern. This triggered
  a requirement to issue a  rule by 2004 to regulate mercury
  emissions from power  plants.

  Reducing Acid Rain
     Acidic deposition or "acid rain" occurs when
  emissions of SO2 and  NOx in the atmosphere react
  with water, oxygen, and oxidants to  form acidic
  compounds. These  compounds fall to earth in a dry
  form (gas and particles) or a wet form (rain, snow, and
  fog). Major human health concerns associated with
  exposure to fine particles include effects  on breathing
  and the respiratory system, damage to lung tissue, and
  premature death. In the environment,  acid rain raises
  the acid levels in certain soils and water bodies, making
  the water unsuitable for some fish and other wildlife; it
  also damages certain trees at some higher elevations.
  Acid rain is carried by the wind, sometimes across state
  and national borders. "In the United  States, prior to
  the implementation of the NOx SIP call (which will
  not begin until 2004),  electric utility plants that burn
  fossil fuels produce about 64 percent  of annual  SO2
  emissions and 26 percent of NO emissions.
     The Acid Rain Program, as authorized by the Clean
  Air Act, is being implemented in two phases: Phase I

  Reductions in SO2 and NOx Emissions from
     Utility Sources Following CAA Title IV
                 Implementation
  20
ID
O

O
15
Ł.10
in
o
'«  c
LLJ
     17.5
            SO2 Emissions
         16.3    15.9
                                               118.7
                                    Without Title IV
                                        1th Title IV
   0
   1980   1985   1990   1995    2000   2005   2010
for SO2 began in 1995 and targeted the largest and
highest-emitting power plants, predominantly coal-fired
units; Phase I for NO  began in 1996. As the chart
     '               x   o
indicates, the programs have significantly reduced
emissions from the  1990 baseline. Phase II for both
pollutants began in 2000. The Acid Rain Program now
covers more than 2,500 units  and includes gas-, oil-,
and coal-fired  units. The  Phase II units installed
continuous emissions monitors  and began reporting
emissions to the Acid Rain Program in 1995. Required
reporting of emissions  from all affected  units was
needed for EPA to assess utilities' compliance with the
program's reduced utilization provisions. It also ensured
a smooth start-up of Phase II in 2000, when all affected
units became subject to SO2 emission reductions. Most
coal-fired Phase II units also became subject to NOx
emission reductions in 2000. The transition  to full
program  operation has progressed smoothly. In
addition, the computer-based Allowance Tracking and
Emissions Tracking Systems, which support the
program  and were enhanced in FY 2000, will be
expanded in the next several years to support operations
of the Ozone Transport Commission's NOx Budget/
Multistate Emissions Trading Program in the Northeast.

SUMMARY OF FY 2000 PERFORMANCE

    EPA  has made significant  progress toward
achieving its long-term goal  of  clean air for all
Americans  through successful and collaborative
integration of regulatory and partnership activities. Final
rules setting standards for cleaner burning engines and
fuels, final rules for passenger vehicles including sports
utility vehicles, proposal of eight and issuance of three
MACT standards, and expansion of  the universe of
electric utility plants covered under the Acid Rain
program all highlight the Agency's movement toward
meeting its strategic  clean air goal.

RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS

Criteria Pollutants
    In FY 2000 EPA completed key research on an
atmospheric model  (the Community Multi-scale Air
Quality model,  or Models-3/CMAQ) that  will allow
state, tribal, and local air quality managers to more
accurately forecast the benefits of  alternative ozone,
PM, and regional haze  source  controls. Models-3/

                                                                                    FY 2000 GPRA Perfomance
                                                                                                        II-5

-------
•a
o
CMAQ simultaneously looks at ozone, PM, visibility,
acid rain, and some toxics, as an aid in evaluating control
strategies for one or several ozone precursors.  EPA
offices and regions are working together to encourage
states to use the model for upcoming SIPs.

    EPA continues to work with state and local agencies
in all areas to develop strategies to help them maintain
clean air or come into compliance while being sensitive
to local economic and other issues. The Agency is
required to examine the NAAQS every 5 years to ensure
that they are protective of human health. Currently, EPA
is working  toward completing a review of the ozone
and PM25 standards by 2002. In addition, the draft plan
for the Ozone Air Quality Criteria Document (AQCD)
is nearly ready for release for public comment and Clean
Air Scientific Advisory  Committee (CASAC) review;
This is an important milestone in the 5-year review of
the tropospheric ozone NAAQS set by the Agency.

    EPA leads research efforts  to characterize human
exposures to PM and to evaluate the  biological
mechanisms behind PM's respiratory and cardiovascular
effects. PM-related research  in FY 2000 included
assessments to determine  the best means to  estimate
health outcomes and the  susceptibility of sensitive
subgroups, including children  and  senior  citizens. A
recently completed  exposure  study  indicates that
exposure of senior citizens to PM creates health  risks.
Research in FY 2000 also  included the evaluation of
the role of various components of  PM,  such as
transition  metals, in producing toxicity EPA is also
conducting research to evaluate, improve, and develop
control technologies for industrial and commercial
sources. Results of these efforts will ensure that the
Agency's review of the PM standard is based on the
most up-to-date scientific standards available. Additional
research focuses on  measurements,  methods, and
models to  support the  review of  the  PM standard,
including the evaluation of the Models-3/CMAQ model
for PM, which the states can use to  predict which
reductions in  emissions sources will  likely achieve
attainment of  PM NAAQS. Also,  in FY 2000, work
continued on the second External Review Draft of the
PM AQCD which will be  released  shortly for public
comment and CASAC review;

Air Toxics
    In FY  2000 EPA's  air toxics research program
developed and demonstrated new methods to assess
risks from urban toxics and conducted research to
develop integrated control and pollution prevention
approaches for source categories (such as utilities, waste
combustors, and industrial boilers) that have the greatest
adverse effect on urban air quality. Results of this
research will support the Agency's efforts to develop
strategies to reduce the risks posed by the multitude of
hazardous air pollutants present in many urban areas
across the United States.

PROGRAM EVALUATION

    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
The CAA requires the Agency to complete periodic
evaluations of the impact of the program. An EPA
report to Congress entitled, The Benefits and Costs of the
Clean Air Act (November 1999), estimated the benefits
and costs of the  1990  Amendments  (http://
www.epa.gov/air/sect812/). The Agency has begun
the process to update this report.
    Air Pollution: Status of Implementation and Issues of the
CAA Amendments of 1990. In response to a request from
Congress, the General Accounting Office (GAO) issued
a report (RCED-00-72) on the status of implementation
of Titles I through VI of the 1990 CAA Amendments.
This evaluation indicated that of the 538 requirements
in those titles with deadlines prior to February 2000 or
with no statutory deadlines, EPA met 409 requirements
and the statutory deadline for 129 requirements. As part
of  the evaluation, GAO obtained views  from
stakeholders on what they considered the key issues
regarding  implementation of the 1990 Amendments.
The stakeholders—state governments, local programs,
industries, and environmental advocacy groups—often
cited the  following issues: the degree of flexibility
allowed  states and the regulated community to
determine  how they will  achieve  air  quality
improvements, the  extent to which  goals and
requirements are clearly specified in  the  statute or
regulations, and the adequacy of resources at the state
and local levels to effectively implement and enforce
the statute. This information will be considered in the
reauthorization of the CAA. (http://www.gao.gov/
new.items/rc00072.pd^.
    EPA's Mobile Source Emissions Factor Model. In 1998
in response to a request from Congress, the National
Academy of Sciences established  a  committee to
evaluate and develop recommendations for improving
II-6
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
EPA's mobile source emissions factor model, MOBILE.
MOBILE is an EPA-developed model used by
environmental and transportation agencies for
estimating emissions from on-road motor vehicles for
air quality planningpurposes. In FY 2000 the committee
issued its report, which included a number of
recommendations for enhancing MOBILE and for
improving the overall process  for estimating mobile
source  emissions.  EPA   is  addressing  the
recommendations as it develops a new  version of
MOBILE, which should be ready in 2001.

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS OF FY 2000
PERFORMANCE ON FY 2001 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE PLAN

    Goal 1 Annual Performance Goals  (APGs) for
FY 2001 reflect successful performance in FY 2000.
For example, the FY 2001 APG for reduction in PM
reflects achievement of the FY 2000 goal by an increase
in the number of areas in which healthy air is maintained
and the associated population  in those areas newly
designated as meeting the PM  standards. This is also
the case for  the CO2, SO2, NO2, and lead reduction
program. In setting APGs and targets for future years,
the Agency will focus on developing outcome-based
program goals where possible. Two areas in which the
Agency currently has good outcome-based APGs are
the NOx and SO2 reduction programs, which are able
to measure emission reductions.
    Performance  in  FY 2000 also impacts  broad
program strategies for future years. The CAA provides
a framework for achieving environmental results by
setting specific targets for each program area. The Act
identifies specific activities and establishes  a multiyear
schedule for carrying them out. Nationally thousands
of air quality monitors provide  the information that is
the foundation for measuring program success. EPA
has a wealth of trend data collected over 30 years for
criteria pollutants;  the Agency is now working toward
a similar network for toxic pollutants. Building on the
FY 2000 strategy developed with the states, EPA will
work toward the deployment of a multi-year effort to
generate information on the variability of air toxics over
time and geographic area.
TABLES OF RESULTS

    The  following  tables  of  results  includes
performance results for the eight FY 2000 APGs that
appear in Goal 1. In cases where the FY 2000 APG is
associated with an FY 1999 APG, the table includes
the FY 1999 APG below the FY 2000 APG for ease in
comparing performance.  Where applicable, the tables
note cases where FY 2000 APGs are supported by state
National Environmental Performance Partnership
System (NEPPS) and CPMs. As described in more detail
in Section I of the report  (the Overview and Analysis),
states use CPMs to evaluate their progress toward
mutual program goals. Additionally, EPA is providing
information on FY 1999 APGs for which data were
not available when the FY 1999 report was published.
                                                                                FY 2000 GPRA Perfomance
                                                                                                    II-7

-------
                                                   FY 2000 Annual Report
                             Annual Performance Goals and Measures - Table of Results
        Summary FY 2000 Performance
       i	       	         —     i
                              nr
          I nl Goals
          1 UJ Not Met
GOAL 1 - CLEAN AIR
                FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                               Planned    Actual
                                                                                                             Actual
         BY 2010, IMPROVE AIR QUALITY FOR AMERICANS LIVING IN AREAS THAT DO NOT MEET NAAQS FOR OZONE
                                                  AND PARTICULATE MATTER.
        FY 2000 APG 1:    Maintain healthy air quality for 33.4 million people living in 43 areas
                         attaining the ozone standard. •«• Corresponds with FY 2000 NEPPS Core
                         Performance Measure (CPM).

        (FY 1999)         Eight additional areas currently classified as non-attainment will have the
                         1-hour ozone standard revoked because they meet the old standard.

        Explanation:      Goal met. Maintained healthy air quality for 33.4 million people living in 43
                         areas meeting the ozone standard. One new area came into attainment and
                         increased the number of people living in areas attaining the ozone standard
                         by 1.7 million, resulting in a total of 35.1 million people living in a total of 44
                         areas designated to attainment.

        Data Source:      The Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS) is composed of two
                         systems: Air Quality Subsystem (AQS), which stores ambient air quality data
                         to determine if nonattainment areas have the three years of clean air data
                         needed for redesignation and Air Facility Subsystem which stores emissions
                         and compliance/enforcement information for facilities. AIRS data are collected
                         from the state and Local Air Monitoring Stations.

                         The Findings and Required Elements Data System  (FREDS) is used to track
                         progress of states and  regions in reviewing and approving the required data
                         elements of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). SIPs define what action a
                         state will take to improve the air quality in areas that do not meet national
                         ambient air quality standards.

        Data Quality:      Each State and Local Air Monitoring Station  (SLAMS) is required to (1) meet
                         network design and siting criteria, (2) provide adequate quality assurance
                         assessment, control, and corrective actions functions, (3) ensure all sampling
                         methods and equipments meet EPA reference or equivalent requirements,
                         and (4)  follow acceptable data validation and record keeping procedures.
                         SLAMS are summarized and reported annually to EPA. SLAMS undergo
                         system  audits to review the overall air quality data collection activity for any
                         needed changes or corrections. For AIRS potential data limitations are (1)
                         incomplete or missing data, (2) inaccuracies due to imprecise measurement
                         and recording, and (3)  inconsistent or non-standard methods of data
                         collection and processing. No external audit of AIRS has been done in the last
                         three years. For FREDS the primary limitation is incomplete or missing data
                         from the Regions. No external audit has been done  on FREDS.
                                                                                        33.4 M
                                                 33.4 M
                                                                                                               10
•a
o
FY 2000 APG 2:   Maintain healthy air quality for 1.2 million people living in 7 areas
                 attaining the PM standards, and increase by 60 thousand the number of
                 people living in areas with healthy air quality that have attained the
                 standard. •«• Corresponds with FY 2000 NEPPS CPM.

(FY 1999)         Deploy particulate matter 2.5 ambient monitors including mass, continuous,
                 speciation, and visibility resulting in a total of 1,500 monitoring sites.

Explanation:      Goal met. Maintained healthy air quality for 1.2 million people living in seven
                 areas attaining the particulate matter (PM) standard. Two new areas came
                 into attainment and increased the number of people  living in areas attaining
                 the PM standard by 76 thousand, resulting in a total  of 1.276 million people
                 living in a total of nine areas designated to attainment.

Data Source:      Same as FY 2000 APG 1.

Data Quality:      Same as FY 2000 APG 1.
                                                                                                1.2 M
                                                                                                60,000
                                                 1.2 M
                                                 75,800
                                                                                                                     1,110
II-8
          EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
      FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                            FY 2000
                                                                                      Planned    Actual
                     FY 1999
                     Actual
FY 2000 APG 3:   Provide new information on the atmospheric concentrations, human
                 exposure, and health effects of particulate matter (PM), including PM
                 2.5, and incorporate it and other peer-reviewed research findings in the
                 Second External Review Draft of the PM AQCD for NAAQS Review.

(FY 1999)         Identify and evaluate at least two plausible biological mechanisms by which
                 particulate matter (PM) causes death and disease in humans.

Performance Measures
 -  Hold CASAC Reviewof draft PM Air Quality Criteria Document (AQCD).
 -  Longitudinal Panel Study on exposure of susceptible sub-populations to  PM.
 -  PM Monitoring Study Data.
 -  Baltimore Study on Response of Elderly to PM.

Explanation:      Goal met. A tremendous amount of new research on atmospheric
                 concentrations, exposures, and health effects of PM was published in
                 FY 2000. This research and the results of the FY 2000 Clean Air Scientific
                 Advisory Committee (CASAC) review of the first draft of the PM AQCD are
                 being incorporated into the second External Review Draft of the PM AQCD
                 for National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) review. FY 2000
                 research products included publication of data generated from PM monitoring
                 studies that reduce  uncertainties on atmospheric PM concentrations and
                 publication of a first generation exposure model for PM of ambient origin.
                 Research also examined ways to estimate the susceptibility of sensitive
                 subgroups, specifically through  a longitudinal study on exposure to PM and a
                 study on the response of the elderly to PM.

Data Source:      Agency generated material.

Data Quality:      As required by the Agency-wide formal peer review policy issued in 1993,
                 and reaffirmed in 1994 and 1998, all major scientific and technical work
                 products used in Agency decision-making are independently peer reviewed
                 before their use. EPA has implemented a rigorous process of peer review for
                 both its in-house and extramural research  programs. Peer review panels
                 include scientists and engineers from academia, industry and other federal
                 agencies.
9/30/00
   1

9/30/00
   1
 9/30/00
    1

 9/30/00
    1
  BY 2010, REDUCE AIRTOXIC EMISSIONS BY 75 PERCENT FROM 1993 LEVELS TO SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE
    THE RISKTO AMERICANS OF CANCER AND OTHER SERIOUS ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS CAUSED BY
                                               AIRBORNE TOXICS.
FY 2000 APG 4:   Air toxic emissions nationwide from both stationary and mobile sources
                 combined will be reduced by 3% from 1999 (for a cumulative reduction
                 of 30% from the1993 levels of 4.3 million tons.)


(FY 1999)         Reduce air toxic emissions by 12% in FY 1999, resulting in cumulative
                 reduction of 25% from 1993 levels.

Explanation:      FY 2000:  FY 2000 data will not be available until  2004 due to time lags
                 associated with reporting and analysis. FY 2000 Target: 3%. Estimated
                 Actual: 9%, from a revised baseline of 5.9 million  tons. The Agency expects
                 to exceed the FY 2000 annual performance goal primarily due to compliance
                 with the large municipal  waste combustion rule. The estimated 9% reduction
                 in FY 2000 would result  in a cumulative reduction of 32% from 1993 levels.
                 These estimated reductions are calculated on the expected reduction from
                 rules becoming effective on  emission sources in FY 2000. Actual emission
                 inventory information from the FY 2002 National Toxics Inventory (NTI) will be
                 available in mid-2004.

                 FY 1999: FY 2000 data will not be available until 2001  due to time lags
                 associated with reporting and analysis. FY 1999 Target: 12%. Estimated
                 Actual:  10%, from a revised  baseline of 5.9  million tons. The target of  12%
                 was calculated against a baseline of 4.3 million tons in 1993. Analysis of the
  3%
  Data
available
   in
FY 2004
                      Data
                    available
                      mid-
                      2001
                                                                                                   GPRA Performance
                                                                                                                      II-9

-------
             FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                                        FY 2000
                      FY 1999
                                                                                                  Planned     Actual
                      Actual
                          1996 NTI indicates that the baseline for 1993 is actually 5.9 million tons.
                          Although emission reduction targets were exceeded, this translates into a
                          smaller percentage  reduction of the increased baseline (estimates for
                          FY 1999 indicate a 14% reduction in air toxic emissions from the 4.3 million
                          ton baseline). The estimated 10% reduction in FY 1999 would result in a
                          cumulative reduction of 23% from  1993 levels. These estimated reductions
                          are calculated on the expected reduction from rules becoming effective on
                          emission sources in FY 1999. Actual emission inventory information from the
                          FY 1999 NTI will be available in mid-2001.

        Data Source:      The NTI is a database that houses information  from other primary sources.
                          For base year 1993 the system includes emissions information for 188
                          hazardous air pollutants from more than 900 stationary sources. The 1996
                          NTI contains facility-specific estimates  from state and local data
                          supplemented with data collected during the development of the Maximum
                          Achievable Control Technology standards and Toxic Release Inventory data.
                          It also includes emissions from large industrial or point source, smaller
                          stationary area sources, and mobile sources.

        Data Quality:      Because NTI is primarily a database to house information from other primary
                          sources, most of the quality assurance and control efforts focus on
                          identifying duplicate data from the different data sources and supplementing
                          missing data. There has been no effort to validate information collected from
                          other databases, but a significant effort is underway to determine the best
                          primary source data in cases where a discrepancy among data sources is
                          found. Mobile source data are validated by using speciated test data from the
                          mobile source emission factor program, along with peer-reviewed models
                          which estimate national tons for the relevant year. Because of the different
                          data sources, not all information in the  NTI has been compiled  using identical
                          methods. Also, for the same reason, there are likely some geographic areas
                          with more detail and accuracy than others. Each base year's NTI has been
                          reviewed by internal EPA staff, state and local agencies, and industry.
        FY 2000 APG 5:   Provide new information and methods to estimate human exposure and
                          health effects from high priority urban air toxics, and complete health
                          assessments for the highest priority hazardous air pollutants (including
                          fuel/fuel additives).

        (FY 1999)         Complete health assessments for five air toxics as high priority.

        Performance Measures
         -  Produce process & framework for incorporating Acute Reference Exposure values in
           Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS).
         -  Submit for Agency Review Three Toxicological  Reviews and Assessments.

        Explanation:      Goal met. Reports have been  published that provide important methods and
                          data on high priority hazardous air pollutants, including the most potent
                          carcinogenic environmental polycyclic aeromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) yet
                          discovered, dibenzo [a,l]pyrene. For non-cancer endpoints new risk
                          assessment guidance for assessing health risks from  acute exposures has
                          been developed, and research results on relationships between exposure
                          concentration and duration have been published. Evaluation of
                          dose-response relationships for several chemicals have  been  completed,  as
                          have fuel/fuel additives reviews, activities that will support the residual  risk,
                          mobile sources, and National  Air Toxics Assessments evaluations and
                          rulemakings. EPA submitted two assessments for consensus  review: vinyl
                          chloride (IRIS  review completed) and hexachlorocyclopentadiene (in IRIS
                          consensus review) while the third assessment (quinoline and  methyl chloride)
                          was delayed and submitted for consensus review during the first quarter of
                          FY 2001.

        Data Source:      Same as FY 2000 APG 3.

        Data Quality:      Same as FY 2000 APG 3.
9/30/00

   3
9/30/00

   2
•a
o
11-10
           EPA's FY2000 Annual Report

-------
     FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                         FY 2000
                                                                                    Planned    Actual
                     FY 1999
                     Actual
  BY 2005, IMPROVE AIR QUALITY FOR AMERICANS LIVING IN AREAS THAT DO NOT MEETTHE NAAQS FOR
                   CARBON MONOXIDE, SULFUR DIOXIDE, LEAD, AND NITROGEN DIOXIDE.
FY 2000 APG 6:    Maintain healthy air quality for 27.7 million people living in 46 areas
                 attaining the CO, SO2, NO2, and Lead standards, and increase by 1.1
                 million the number of people living in areas with healthy air quality that
                 have attained the standard.

(FY 1999)         Certify that 14 of the 58 estimated remaining nonattainment areas have
                 achieved the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for carbon
                 monoxide, sulfur dioxide, or lead.

Explanation:      Goal met. Maintained healthy air quality for 27.7 million people living in
                 46 areas meeting the carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen
                 dioxide (NO2) and Lead standards. Ten new areas came into attainment and
                 increased the number of  people living in areas attaining the standards by
                 3.4, million resulting in a total of 31.1 million  people living in a total of 56
                 areas designated to attainment.

Data Source:      Same as FY 2000 APG 1.

Data Quality:      Same as FY 2000 APG 1.
27.7 M
 1.1 M
27.7 M
3.41 M
                       13
  BY 2010, AMBIENT SULFATES ANDTOTAL SULFUR DEPOSITION WILL BE REDUCED BY 20-40% FROM 1980
  LEVELS DUETO REDUCED SULFUR DIOXIDE EMISSIONS FROM UTILITIES AND INDUSTRIAL SOURCES. BY
   2000, AMBIENT NITRATES ANDTOTAL NITROGEN DEPOSITION WILL BE REDUCED BY 5-10% FROM 1980
   LEVELS DUETO REDUCED EMISSIONS OF NITROGEN OXIDES FROM UTILITIES AND MOBILE SOURCES.
FY 2000 APG 7:    5 million tons of S02 emissions from utility sources will be reduced
                 from the 1980 baseline.

(FY 1999)         Maintain 4 million tons of sulfur dioxide (SO,) emissions reduction from utility
                 sources.

Explanation:      Although emissions data are not available until one year after the end of the
                 calendar year, the Agency is on track to achieve the annual performance
                 goal.

Data Source:      Emissions Tracking  System (ETS) receives hourly measurements of SO2 and
                 nitrogen oxide (NOX) volumetric flow, carbon dioxide (CO2), and other emission-
                 related parameters  from more than 2,000 facilities affected by Title IV.

                 Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems (CEMS) collect data to measure
                 NOX and SO2 emissions at major electric utitlities.

                 Clean Air Status Trends Network (CASTNet) is primarily an eastern, long-term
                 dry deposition network funded and operated by EPA. The database, which is
                 also maintained by  EPA, measures sulfate and nitrate dry deposition and
                 meteorological information at approximately 70 active monitoring sites.

                 National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP) is a database that
                 provides measurements of sulfate and nitrate wet deposition at
                 approximately 200  active monitoring sites. EPA, along with several other
                 federal agencies, state, and other private organizations, provide funding and
                 support for the system. The database is maintained by the Illinois state
                 Water Survey/University of Illinois.

Data Quality:      The Agency performs a series of quality assurance tests of CEMS
                 performance. For these tests emissions data are collected under highly
                 structured, carefully designed testing conditions, which involve either high
                 quality standard reference materials or multiple instruments performing
                 simultaneous emission measurements. The resulting data are screened and
                 analyzed using  a battery of statistical procedures, including one that tests for
                 systematic bias. If the CEMS fails the bias test, then either the problem is
                 corrected or adjusted to prevent the low bias. CASTNet and NADP have
                 established data quality objectives and quality control  procedures for
                 accuracy, precision, and representativeness. These data are intended to
                 establish trends in  wet deposition and precipitation chemistry.
5 million
  tons
  Data
available
 in late
  2001
                       5.04
                     million
                       tons
                                                                                                 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                                   11-11

-------
FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
FY 2000 APG 8: 2 million tons of NOX emissions from utility coal-fired utility sources will
be reduced from the levels before implementation of Title IV of the
Clean Air Act Amendments.
(FY 1999) Maintain 300,000 tons of nitrogen oxides (NOJ reduction from coal-fired
utility sources.
Explanation: Although emissions data are not available until one year after the end of the
calendar year, the Agency is on track to achieve the annual performance
goal.
Data Source: Same as FY 2000 APG 7.
Data Quality: Same as FY 2000 APG 7.
FY 2000
Planned
2 million
tons








Actual
Data
available
in late
2001






FY 1999
Actual



420,000
tons





FY
(Actual
1999 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS WITHOUT CORRESPONDING FY 2000 GOALS
Performance Data Available in FY 2000 and Beyond or Performance Targets Beyond FY 2000 )

FY 1999 APG:
Explanation:
Data Source:
Data Quality:
Maintain 4 million tons of sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions reduction from utility
sources, and maintain 300,000 tons of nitrogen oxides (NOX) reduction from
coal-fired utility sources.
Based on information received in FY 2000, EPA exceeded its FY 1999 target. The
Agency surpassed its target of 4 million tons of SO2 emissions reductions and
actually reduced SO2 emissions from utility sources by 5.04 million tons from the
1980 baseline. The Agency also reduced NOx from 265 coal-fired utility units by 420
thousand tons, exceeding the goal by 120 thousand tons.
Same as FY 2000 APG 7.
Same as FY 2000 APG 7.
Planned
4 million
tons
300,000
tons


Actual
5.04
million
tons
420,000
tons


•a
o
11-12
             EPA's FY2000 Annual Report

-------
   Goal 2 FY 2000 Obligations
            GOAL 2:  CLEAN AND SAFE WATER
    Note: EPA FY2000 Obligations
        were $8,974 million
   All Americans will have drinking water that is clean and safe to
   drink. Effective protection of America's rivers, lakes, wetlands,
 aquifers, and coastal and ocean waters will sustain fish, plants, and
wildlife, as well as recreational, subsistence, and economic activities.
    Watersheds and their aquatic ecosystems will be restored and
 protected to improve human health, enhance water quality, reduce
              flooding, and provide habitat for wildlife.
OVERVIEW

    Safe drinking water is the first line of defense in
protecting human health. The American public enjoys
one of the safest drinking water supplies in the world,
but illnesses due to contaminants continue to occur. In
FY 2000 there were no  reported major disease
outbreaks  caused  by  microbial  or chemical
contaminants in drinking water, but during the past
decade drinking water contamination caused illness and
even death in places such as Milwaukee, Wisconsin;
Alpine, Wyoming;  and rural upstate New York. As
drinking  water  infrastructure  ages  and  new
contaminants are identified, maintaining the nation's
safe drinking water  supply remains a  critical challenge.
EPAs human health protection concerns also extend
to threats posed by swimming at contaminated beaches
or eating contaminated fish.

    Clean water and healthy aquatic ecosystems support
all life, are vital to many sectors of the U.S. economy,
and play an important role in Native American culture.
Fish, shellfish, and many bird species depend on healthy
aquatic ecosystems for food and shelter. Aquatic plants,
which provide food and cover to many aquatic species,
need clean water to thrive. U.S. manufacturers and the
agricultural industry use vast quantities of clean water
every year to produce products, irrigate crops, and raise
animals. The nation's waters are the  number one
vacation choice for Americans. For example, in Long
Island Sound, New York, beachgoers contribute more
than $800 million annually to the local economy. Many
Native American tribes value clean  water and some
tribes invoke the spirit of water in cultural ceremonies
for medicinal and purification purposes.
                        FY 2000 PERFORMANCE

                        Protecting People From Contamination in Drinking
                        Water, Fish, and Recreational Waters
                        Improving Drinking Water Quality
                            For the second consecutive year at least 91 percent
                        of  the American public  served by community water
                        systems received water meeting all health-based drinking
                        water standards in effect since 1994, even as EPA, states
                        and tribes worked  collaboratively to develop new
                        national standards and regulations.  In  addition the
                        population served by non-transient,  non-community
                        (NTNC) drinking water systems with no violations in
                        FY 2000 was 93 percent, just below the target of 96
                        percent. EPA missed the target because the Agency
                        estimated FY 2000  performance based on the data
                        reported by non-transient water systems several years

                            Population Served by Community Water
                          Systems Meeting Drinking Water Standards
                                                          1994  1995  1996  1997  1999  2000  2005
                                                                 94

                                                                 92

                                                                 90 |

                                                                 88 -5
                                                                    a.
                                                                 86 S.
                                                                    4-«
                                                                 84 g
                                                                    o
                                                                 82 Ł

                                                                 80

                                                                 78

                                                                 76

                                                                                FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                    11-13

-------
    ago. The  actual information reported for FY 2000
    includes data from many more of these systems, which
    are  now subject  to  more rigorous  reporting
    requirements.  The FY 2000 data reflects a more
    complete and accurate picture  of human health
    protection for persons who drink water supplied by
    these NTNC drinking water systems. The Agency has
    worked diligently with states  and water systems over
    the past few years to implement its drinking water data
    reliability plan.

        In FY 2000 EPA headquarters and regions, tribes
    and states took significant  actions  in  four key areas:
    focusing  regulations on high-risk contaminants,
    improving consumer right-to-know about drinking
    water quality, protecting source waters, and financing
    improvements to drinking water systems.  To address
    microbial  contaminants such as Cryptosporidium, E. coli,
    and Giardia, which are the most widespread threat to
    drinking water, in the spring of 2000  EPA proposed
    the Ground Water Rule and the Long-Term Enhanced
    Surface Water Treatment Rule. These two rules  will
    protect consumers served by groundwater and small
    surface water systems by preventing up to 198,000 cases
    of  waterborne disease per year. They build on the
    Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule,
    promulgated in 1998, which required surface water
    systems serving over 10,000 persons to protect against
    microbial contamination. Together these rules  will
    complete  the  first series of measures for microbial
    protection, and cover all consumers of  water provided
    by public  water systems, whether from surface water
    or groundwater, in small towns and large cities.
        In addition EPA and a Federal Advisory Committee
    composed  of  states,  water  systems,  medical
    professionals,  and other public officials,  reached
    agreement on the  second phase of standards mandated
    by  the 1996  Safe Drinking Water  Act  (SDWA)
    Amendments  involving microbial contaminants,
    disinfectants used to treat such contaminants,  and
    disinfection byproducts resulting from treatment. These
    standards will increase controls for source waters at high
    risk of contamination by Cryptosporidium, et.al. Also they
    are examples of the Agency's first endeavor to address
    acute health effects that may be caused by disinfection
    byproducts  and thereby will  assure equal protection
    from exposure to these byproducts throughout the
    drinking water distribution system.
•a
o
    Radon and arsenic were the high-risk chemical
contaminants addressed by the drinking water program
in FY 2000. In November 1999 the Agency proposed
a multimedia mitigation approach for radon that will
have a significant effect on reducing the human health
risk from radon in drinking water as well as in indoor
air. EPA also proposed new protective standards  to
address arsenic in drinking water in June 2000. Arsenic
is  a known carcinogen and is also linked to many
noncancer health effects. EPA, states, tribes, and water
systems agree that  the current,  50-year old arsenic
standard of 50 parts per billion (ppb) does not provide
adequate human health protection. In March 1999 the
National Academy  of Sciences  concluded that the
current 50 ppb standard does not protect human health
and recommended  that it be revised downward  as
quickly as possible. Consequently the revised rule not
only proposed a lower level but also requested comment
from  both the  drinking water community and the
general public on alternative regulatory levels that would
be reviewed thoroughly and carefully during the  final
rulemaking process.

    The human health protection afforded by these new
standards  can be realized only if there is effective
implementation at the state, tribal and local levels.  In
this regard EPA conducted more than 20 training and
technical assistance  sessions  with regional, state, and
drinking water utility staff during  FY 2000 on  rules
addressing microbial contaminants  and disinfectants/
disinfection byproducts, lead and copper, consumer
confidence, and unregulated contaminant monitoring,
as well as on guidelines for operator certification. Ten
workshops on small systems' concerns were also held
nationwide. States,  associations,  and environmental
groups have undertaken  an  unprecedented effort at
training and technical assistance  for water systems,
particularly small systems, local governments, and the
general  public. In  addition EPA  has worked  with
partners to lead many nationwide endeavors to increase
public drinking water protection and awareness. All
states are overseeing capacity development and operator
certification programs  to ensure that owners and
operators  of  public  water systems  are   fully
implementing existing and new SDWA requirements.
    The Agency is approaching and promoting
prevention of drinking water contamination through
both voluntary  and mandatory activities.  Fifty states
and territories have an EPA-approved Source Water
Assessment and Prevention Program  and conduct
11-14
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
      CONSUMERS GET BETTER AND FASTER
           INFORMATION ABOUT THEIR
                DRINKING WATER
  As a result of the new Consumer Confidence Report
  Rule, for the first time ever approximately 253 million
  Americans have access  to  annual  consumer
  confidence reports on the quality and safety of their
  drinking water. These reports give customers of
  drinking water systems the information they need to
  make their  own health  decisions. More than 100
  million Americans are able to read their water quality
  reports  on-line. Water  systems, states, and EPA
  worked hard to assure compliance with this rule in its
  first year, providing reports for 99 percent of  the
  population covered by the rule. In May 2000  the
  Agency also revised the Public  Notification Rule to
  require public water systems to alert consumers within
  24 hours if there is  a serious  problem with their
  drinking water that might pose a health risk.
 ^                                           ^

assessments of their public water supplies. Data from
these assessments will help determine the susceptibility
to contamination  of  each state's sources  of public
drinking water and set the stage for community water
systems to target their efforts to actual or potential high-
risk  contaminants.  Forty-nine  states  are voluntarily
going beyond the requirement of the SDWA, which is
only to complete the assessments, by beginning to act
to prevent source water contamination,  based on
information gathered during the assessments. These
next steps are critical to the future of the drinkingwater
program, and are the primary responsibilities of states,
tribes, and water systems  to implement. In December
1999 EPA issued new final regulations on two types of
shallow disposal wells into which a variety of hazardous
and nonhazardous fluids (e.g., chemicals, mining,  oil,
and gas) is injected below the land's surface. There are
an estimated one million  underground injection wells
nationwide, of which about 700,000 are shallow disposal
wells. The new regulations, targeted to motor vehicle
disposal and cesspools, are a vital tool in ensuring that
fluid wastes are contained in these disposal wells safely,
and do not pose a health risk to the majority of U.S.
public water systems that get their drinking water from
groundwater.

    Over  the past  four years of the Drinking Water
State Revolving Fund (DWSRF), EPA has made
available approximately $3.6  billion in assistance to all
50 states, Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia, and
the territories to establish their revolving loan programs,
and states have moved quickly to make  these funds
available to water  systems. Since  1997 more than
1,400 loans totaling over $2.8 billion support projects
to modernize or replace outdated plants and pipes as
well as to construct new systems. Small water systems
have been a focus of these loans, with over three-fourths
awarded to systems  serving fewer than 10,000 people.
These loans enable water systems to  address critical
human health needs, even as the cost of providing safe
drinking water—finding a water supply,  treating  the
water, delivering the water, and  maintaining  the
system—continues to be  a challenge. EPA's  1997
Drinking Water Needs Survey Report to  Congress identified
more than $138 billion in industry needs, the vast
majority of which are targeted  for delivery of water,
rather than for meeting SDWA requirements.
Reducing Exposure to Contaminated Fish

    States and tribes have primary  responsibility  for
informing the public about  the risks of eating
contaminated  fish,  and EPA plays  a  leadership and
support role. In 1999  approximately seven percent of
river miles and 16 percent of lake acres were assessed
to determine if they contain fish or shellfish that should
not be eaten or should be eaten only in limited quantities,
particularly by sensitive populations such as pregnant
women and young children. The target of ten percent
of river miles assessed was not met. This was primarily
because states  focused their resources  on lakes, where
most  recreational fishing occurs. The total number of
fish advisories in the United States rose by 145 or six
percent (seepage 11-41 in Goal 4). Advisories increased
for mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls  (PCBs), dioxin,
and  dichlorodiphenytrichloroethane (DDT), but
decreased for chlordane again in FY 2000. The increase
in advisories generally reflects more assessments being
performed and improved monitoring and data
collection methods. Currently, 40 states follow EPA's
guidance for developing fish consumption advisories
based on risk assessments, up from 25 states in 1998.
    To support the fish advisory program, EPA in
FY 2000 updated its technical guidance documents to
include new toxicity information for several persistent
bioaccumulative toxics, new fish consumption limits
for recreational  and subsistence  fishers,  and
recommendations for simplified advisory approaches.
Pursuant to the Clean Water Action Plan (CWAP), EPA
                             FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                  11-15

-------
    and the American Fisheries Society published a joint
    report on the national consistency of fish consumption
    advisory programs.
    Improving Beach Monitoring and Public Notification
        In FY 2000 EPA and state officials worked to
    strengthen the voluntary beach protection program to
    help states and local communities protect their residents
    from exposure to contaminated waters at their beaches.
      NEW JERSEY LEADS THE WAY IN BEACH WATCH
      The  State of New Jersey is working with 94 of its
      coastal municipalities to eliminate beach pollution.
      The municipalities are mapping their storm water and
      sewage lines and monitoring storm water discharges
      to coastal waters. Beach closings are usually associated
      with specific storm events or sewage collection system
      disruptions. Over the past several years, contamination
      incidents and subsequent beach closings have been
      more localized and short-lived. The State expects that
      continuing to  improve storm water management
      will  further  decrease the  need   for  beach
      closings.
     X. _ >
    EPAs internet site posted information provided by state
    and local officials on 1,981 beaches—35 percent more
    beaches than last year, and approximately 50 percent
    more beaches than when the program began in 1997.
    This information included 150 digitized maps available
    to  the public,  meeting  EPA's goal for FY 2000.
    Approximately 459 beaches (24 percent of the reported
    beaches) had at least one advisory or closing during the
year. Although the number of beaches reported has
increased significantly during the past three years, the
percentage of beaches with a closing or advisory has
remained consistent at approximately 25 percent.
Leading causes of impairment included rain leading to
storm water runoff which caused elevated bacterial
levels.

    EPA also provided technical assistance materials to
help state and local officials improve their monitoring and
advisory programs. EPA published proceedings of two
major conferences which addressed needs andprocedures
designed to improve beach monitoring and public
notification across the country. The Agency also produced
and distributed a training video and manual on using EPA
recommended recreational water quality indicators
(enterococci andŁL colt) to assess beach water quality. EPA
will continue to work with state and local officials, and
healthprofessionals to improve the quality and consistency
of monitoring and reporting beach water conditions and
to improve and increase communications with the public.

Conserving and Enhancing the Nation's Waters

    In  the  latest national inventory of water quality
summarized below, states, tribes, territories,  and
interstate commissions  report that about  40 percent
of the U.S. streams, lakes, and estuaries assessed (about
32 percent of all U.S. waters) were not clean enough to
support uses like fishing and swimming. The leading
pollutants in impaired waters are  sediment, bacteria,
nutrients, and metals. Runoff from agricultural lands
and urban areas is the primary source of these
pollutants.
SUMMARY PROFILE: 1998 NATIONAL WATER QUALITY INVENTORY REPORT TO CONGRESS
Waterbody Type
River (miles)
Lakes (acres)
Estuaries (sq. miles)
Total Size
3,662,225
41,593,748
90,465
Amount Assessed
(% of Total)
842,426 (23%)
17,390,370 (42%)
28,687 (32%)
Good*
(% of Assessed)
463,441 (55%)
7,927,486 (46%)
13,439 (47%)
Good but
Threatened*
(% of Assessed)
85,544 (10%)
1,565,175 (9%)
2,766 (10%)
Polluted*
(% of Assessed)
291,264 (35%)
7,897,110 (45%)
12,482 (44%)
* Includes waterbodies assessed as not attainable for one or more uses. Note: percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding.
•a
o
11-16     EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
    The CWAP calls for states to identify, from among
the 2,262 watersheds nationwide, those high priority
watersheds for which  restoration  plans will  be
developed and  actions  taken to restore water quality.
For FY 2000 EPA established  an ambitious goal of
having improvement projects underway in 350, or about
40 percent, of the 889 high-priority watersheds
identified by states through last year's unified watershed
assessments. Funded largely through increased grants
to states for implementation  of nonpoint  source
controls, projects are underway in 324 high priority
watersheds. This is  slightly short of  EPA's goal, but
indicates a significant promise  of real water quality
improvements in impaired watersheds.
    State and tribal water quality standards  represent
water quality goals for  each water body and establish
the regulatory groundwork for the water quality-based
controls (such  as the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits) necessary to
protect human  and ecological health. In FY 2000 the
Agency issued guidance to assist states and tribes in
assessing the biological  health of their  waters and
recommended new criteria that could be incorporated
into existing standards to control nutrients and disease-
causing microorganisms. During  FY  2000  EPA
completed new methods  for sediment toxicity testing
and compiled information on the food chain effects
of contaminated sediments. EPA also issued a revised
methodology for deriving ambient water quality criteria
to protect human health. The methodology provides
guidance to states and tribes to develop  criteria and
describes the Agency's process for developing national
criteria.  In FY 2000 EPA acted on new water quality
standard submissions for 35 states and 16 tribes. This
total did not meet the FY 2000 goal of 22 tribes because
tribes have not yet been approved as expected for
"treatment as a state" which is a pre-condition of being
approved to run a tribal water quality standards
program. In addition  some extended consultations
delayed the submission of tribal water quality standards.

    During FY 2000 states and  EPA made significant
progress toward commitments  on core performance
measures for determining the sources of pollution and
designing clean-up plans, known as Total Maximum
Daily Loads (TMDLs). This program is the framework
for working in partnership cooperatively with the states
to clean up America's  polluted waterways under the
Clean Water Act (CWA). Under existing authorities of
the 2,674 water segments previously identified by states
as being polluted and needing TMDLs in FY 2000,
states submitted TMDLs for 2,167. EPA approved
1,276 TMDLs submitted by states, and EPA established
166 TMDLs. The number of TMDLs  submitted is
greater than the number of TMDLs approved, primarily
due to the large number of TMDLs submitted for non-
impaired waters under CWA Section 303 (d) (3), which
does not require either approval or disapproval by EPA.
In July 2000 EPA issued a final rule  addressing the
national TMDL program.

    EPA continued work to support focused coastal
watershed protection activities through efforts in the
28 estuaries in the National Estuary Program. In
addition the Agency completed two ocean dumping site
designation actions, including a proposed rule to
designate an ocean disposal site off Coos Bay, Oregon,
and the final designation of the Atchafalaya River,
Bayous Chene, Boeuf, and Black disposal sites  off the
Louisiana coast.
    Understanding the scope and quality of our nation's
wetlands continues to be a top program priority for
EPA. Wetlands play a pivotal role in ensuring watershed
health by filtering contaminants, controlling flooding,
and serving as a critical  habitat for many species of
plants and  animals. In FY 2000 EPA met  its goal of
four more states that made significant progress toward
establishing a wetlands monitoring program. EPA also
continued working with the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to make the wetlands  permitting program
more environmentally protective, including funding the
National Academy of Sciences to study the effectiveness
of compensatory mitigation in the wetlands permitting
program.

    The Chesapeake Bay  Program Partners have been
working to restore water quality and key habitats for
the Bay's living resources. Underwater grass beds are a
vital habitat for fish, crabs, and other bay creatures. The
grasses also  serve as a nursery habitat for many fish
species. The table displays the trend in Bay grass acreage.
From 1985  to 2000,  the Chesapeake Bay Program
Partners restored over 31,000 acres of  Bay grass beds,
contributing significantly to the current total level of
68, 125 acres of submerged aquatic vegetation.
Although the Agency's FY 2000 target of 71,500 was
not achieved, increases  are expected  to continue as
overall water quality improves.
                                                                                   FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                       11-17

-------
       600
            Chesapeake Bay Grass Restoration
                   Potential Habitat (600,000 acres)
                      Interim Goal (114,000 acres)
           78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 i
        The effects of population increases and settlement
    shifts to coastal areas represent a particular challenge
    in the Gulf of Mexico region. In FY 2000 EPA's Gulf
    of Mexico Program, through the leadership of the five
    gulf states, teamed with numerous coastal communities,
    environmental organizations, and business and industry
    leaders to assist in the restoration of 31 impaired coastal
    water bodies.
        In addition, in  FY 2000  the  Gulf Program's
    innovative public  and private partnerships resulted in a
    threefold increase in assistance to the states and coastal
    communities  for projects to  restore their coastal
    watersheds. New projects included protection and
    restoration  of more than 800 acres of important
    seagrass and coastal  wetland habitats, and significant
    results have been achieved through Gulf Five Star
    Restoration Partnership  projects.

    Reducing Pollutant Loadings
    Reducing Point Source Pollution
        A key element of the Agency's  efforts to achieve
    its overarching goal of clean and  safe water is the
    reduction of pollutant discharges from point sources
    and nonpoint  sources. Under the NPDES program,
    specific limits  are set for pollutants discharged from
    point sources into waters of the United States. These
    limits are designed to ensure that national technology-
    based standards (effluent limitations and guidelines) and
    water quality-based requirements are adequate to meet
    water quality standards throughout the  country. In
support of this effort, a number of activities took place
in FY 2000, including the following:

•   Rulemakings to address wet weather  pollution
    include: (1)  promulgation of a final regulation
    addressing storm water discharges (the Storm Water
    Phase II Final Rule) which are a leading cause of
    impairment for the nation's  rivers, lakes, and
    estuaries; and (2) development of draft proposed
    rules for sanitary sewer overflows, after an extensive
    stakeholder process.

•   Implementation of an aggressive strategy to reduce
    the  backlog of NPDES permits  in regions and
    states (see  below). Nationwide, at the end of
    FY 2000  approximately 70 percent of NPDES
    permits were current. This represents a 16 percent
    increase over the 54 percent that were current as
    of November 1998. Eleven states are already below
    the  ten percent backlog target,  and a total of 18
    states are on track to meet the target by December
    31,2001. At the end of FY 2000,44.3 percent (285)
    of the 644 total EPA issued permits for major point
    sources were expired;  78.2 percent (1,603) of the
    2,140 EPA issued permits for minor point sources
    were expired. Of 6,115 state-issued permits for
    major point sources,  26.2 percent (1,603) were
    expired, and of 49,672 state-issued permits for
    minor point sources,  15,563 or 31.3 percent were
    expired. The Agency will  continue to work with
    regions and  states to ensure that they take more
    aggressive steps to meet the 2005 corrective action
    date.

•   Continued work on new guidance and standards
    for  Concentrated  Animal Feeding Operations
    (CAFOs) to mitigate  actual and potential water
    quality impacts  from thousands of CAFOs. The
    largest may have as many as a million animals at
    one facility. Manure from stockpiles, lagoons, or
    excessive land application can reach waterways
    through runoff, erosion, spills, or via ground water.
    These discharges can result in excessive nutrients
    (nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium), oxygen-
    depleting substances, and other pollutants in the
    water. This pollution can kill fish and shellfish, cause
    excess algae  growth, harm marine mammals, and
    contaminate drinking water.

    Providing vital financial support for each of these
activities is the  Clean Water State Revolving Fund
11-18
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
program (CWSRF). For FY2000 the CWSRF made
nearly $4.1 billion available for nationwide construction
of wastewater treatment facilities. The repayments of
these project loans keeps the funds "revolving" and
continually working for American taxpayers. For
FY 2000 the CWSRF program continued to encourage
use of state Integrated Priority Planning Systems to
target  new projects at each state's most pressing
pollution control needs.  Since CWSRF financing began
in 1988, more than $30 billion in  pollution  control
financing has been provided to help achieve water
quality standards.

   In  FY 2000 EPA promulgated four new effluent
limitation  guidelines for the landfill, commercial
hazardous waste combustor, transportation equipment
cleaning, and centralized waste treatment industries,
which  should result in combined pollution  reduction
benefits of more than 65 million pounds of pollutants
per year. The Agency also proposed a rule to prevent
large fish kills at cooling water intakes at new facilities
and issued  the 2000 Effluent  Guidelines Plan, which
outlined a  new strategy for future regulation. EPA
published a final test procedure for cyanide that will
help NPDES permit writers set limits and help regulated
facilities demonstrate compliance with those limits.

Strengthening State Nonpoint Source Programs

   For the last several  years,  EPA has been working
with states  to upgrade and strengthen their nonpoint
source control programs. In FY 2000 EPA completed
draft guidelines for management of on-site wastewater
treatment ("septic") systems and began a major outreach
effort to help states support these guidelines. By the
end of FY 2000,  49 states had upgraded  statewide
nonpoint source management programs approved by
EPA, exceeding the goal of 45 states. The states'
upgraded 319 nonpoint source grant programs have
each established specific goals and objectives that are
related in large part to long-term goals to restore the
quality of impaired waters  over a given time period
(usually about 15 years). They emphasize partnerships,
operating in both watershed and statewide contexts, as
appropriate, to accomplish their program goals. States
focused one-half of their nonpoint source grants ($100
million) for implementation of watershed restoration
strategies that are designed to address their most critical
water quality problems.  In FY 2000 EPA encouraged
states to use the CWSRF for nonpoint source pollution
control, including watershed restoration projects. As
of June 30,2000, 28 states had provided a total of $1.2
billion for some 2,100 nonpoint  source  pollution
control projects since the beginning of the program.

SUMMARY OF FY 2000 PERFORMANCE

    During FY 2000,  EPA, states, and tribes made
significant strides in addressing core challenges in the
water program. Public  participation increased in many
parts of the water program. These engaged citizens
are vital to achieving our shared watershed goals. EPA
will continue to support states and tribes as they
encourage more  community engagement in decisions
about environmental resources and other actions which
affect human health and the environment. EPA will
continue to develop and improve the program tools
such as standards, permits, public  information, and
resources which help communities to achieve their goals.

STRENGTHENING PROGRAM INTEGRITY
THROUGH IMPROVED MANAGEMENT

    EPA is continuing to implement an aggressive
strategy to reduce the backlog of NPDES permits. The
success of this strategy is critical to the Agency's ability
to maintain the integrity of the NPDES program and,
ultimately, to make progress toward achieving the overall
loadings reduction goal. As of  October 2000 about
70 percent of NPDES permits are current. This
represents an improvement of  16 percent from the
backlog measured in November 1998 (54 percent). Over
the past year, the Agency has taken steps to ensure that
regions and states take more aggressive steps to meet
the 2005 corrective action date.
    The Agency completed a comprehensive evaluation
of the water quality standards program and took several
actions to help eliminate the backlog in EPA approvals/
disapprovals  of  state  water  quality  standards
submissions. As of October 2000 EPA was overdue in
approving or disapproving 45 new or revised standards
from 21 states and six tribes, and had yet to promulgate
19 sets of federal replacement standards for 15 states
that have not corrected the portions  of their standards   §.
previously disapproved. Backlogs in EPA water quality   n
standards  actions delay timely  decisions  to control   §
environmental problems, increase uncertainty, and   Ł
reduce credibility. EPA placed the highest priority on   ^
resolving the outstanding disapprovals and unreviewed   S
                                                                                  FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                     11-19

-------
•a
o
standards and made considerable progress in FY 2000.
The Agency is also working to identify and eliminate
the problems that generated the backlogs and other
problems. These  efforts include  conducting an
evaluation of  the water quality standards  program;
working with  states to develop  a joint strategy to
improve the water  quality standards development,
review,  and  approval process; and continuing work
toward  finalizing a Memorandum of Agreement on
coordinating implementation of the CWA and the
Endangered Species Act.
   EPA is in  the process of implementing a multi-
step action plan to enhance  and improve  the
completeness,  accuracy, and timeliness of data in the
Agency's Safe Drinking Water Information System
(SDWIS). Human health protection is at risk when the
Agency does not have reliable and comprehensive data
to ensure that safe drinking water is being provided by
all public drinking water systems. During FY 2000 the
Agency developed  and implemented state-specific
training for  data entry into SDWIS, conducted data
verification audits in 12 states, and developed a new
transaction processing and tracking report. In addition,
the Agency  initiated efforts  to develop a long-term
Information Strategy Plan that addresses drinkingwater
data collection and data management issues over the
next 5 to 10 years.

   Please see Section III -ManagementAccomplishments and
Challenges for a further discussion of the above issues.

RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS

   Goal 2-related research conducted  in FY 2000
continued to strengthen the scientific basis for drinking
water standards by providing improved methods  and
new data  to better evaluate and control  the risks
associated with exposure to chemical and  microbial
contaminants in drinking water. To support the SDWA
and its 1996 amendments, EPAs drinking water research
program focused on the development of health effects
data, analytical tools, and risk assessment methods for
disinfectant  by-products  (DBPs), waterborne
pathogens, and arsenic. The Agency also continued to
develop and  evaluate cost-effective treatment
technologies for  removing pathogens  from water
supplies while minimizing DBP formation, and for
maintaining the  quality  of treated water in  the
distribution system. Increased emphasis was placed on
                                                         filling key data gaps and  developing methods for
                                                         chemicals and microbial pathogens on the Contaminant
                                                         Candidate List.
                                                            Research in FY 2000 evaluated exposures to
                                                         stressors and their effects on aquatic systems and will
                                                         improve the Agency's understanding of the structure,
                                                         function, and characteristics of those  systems.  This
                                                         research will be used to improve risk assessment
                                                         methods to develop aquatic life, habitat, and wildlife
                                                         criteria. The Agency is also developing assessment
                                                         methods and cost-effective  management technologies
                                                         for contaminated sediments,  with an emphasis on
                                                         identifying innovative in situ solutions. In FY 2000 EPA
                                                         continued to develop diagnostic tools to evaluate the
                                                         exposures to toxic constituents of wet weather flows.
                                                         The Agency also continued to develop and validate
                                                         effective watershed management strategies for
                                                         controlling wet weather flows, especially high-volume,
                                                         toxic flows. Research was also conducted to develop
                                                         the effective beach evaluation tools necessary to make
                                                         timely and informed decisions on beach advisories and
                                                         closures.

                                                         PROGRAM EVALUATION

                                                            The General Accounting Office conducted a study
                                                         on the states' ability to implement increasing drinking
                                                         water program requirements. The final report of the
                                                         study was released at a congressional hearing held on
                                                         September 19, 2000, by the Subcommittee  on Health
                                                         and the Environment of the  House Committee on
                                                         Commerce (www.gao.gov, Report T-RCED-00-298).
                                                         Prior to the  release of GAO's report, EPA and the
                                                         Association of State Drinking Water Administrators
                                                         (ASDWA) agreed on actions to take in FY 2001 to
                                                         address this issue. EPA will work with ASDWA and
                                                         states to determine each state's program  status,
                                                         particularly to identify barriers and common problems.
                                                         EPAs regions will then work with individual states to
                                                         address barriers that are hindering each state's ability to
                                                         fully meet SDWA goals. EPA headquarters is working
                                                         with regions to share lessons  learned about how to
                                                         simplify and improve implementation of drinking water
                                                         regulations. EPA plans to continue its effort to reduce
                                                         monitoring and data collection burdens while still
                                                         collecting adequate high quality data to meet essential
                                                         program needs.
11-20
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
    In addition to external studies, in FY 2000 EPA
conducted several internal reviews which expanded its
ability to use evaluation to strengthen program
management to achieve the goals of clean and safe
water. EPA assessed the process  of developing,
reviewing and approving state water quality standards.
These state-adopted standards  describe how water
bodies will be used and contain the water quality criteria
that must be  met to protect those designated uses.
Developing standards is primarily a state function. EPAs
role is to review, in appropriate consultation with the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine
Fisheries Service (the Services), and affirm that the state
standards meet the  requirements of the CWA. The
standards review and approval process  has  been
criticized for being too slow and inefficient.  EPA
conducted a thorough nationwide evaluation of the
program to identify the causes and recommend
solutions that will improve EPAs  approval process and
assure that standards are based on sound science and
that states have determined appropriate designated uses
and criteria for monitoring. The evaluation found that
statutory and programmatic differences, lack  of
sufficient resources and technical expertise, inefficient
coordination and communication, and lack of clear and
consistent national  guidance all contributed to the
problem. EPA is  implementing  several of the
recommendations. In early FY 2001 the Agency will
enter  into a Memorandum of Agreement with the
Services to streamline  the now complex and  time-
consuming review procedures related to the
Endangered Species Act. The Agency also expects to
complete a strategy for implementing other study
recommendations during the latter part of  FY 2001.

    EPA completed an internal evaluation  of the
National Marine Debris Monitoring Program,  to
determine whether this voluntary program is statistically
effective and whether the program design remains valid.
Preliminary results suggest that the program will meet
its original goals of measuring the amount of marine
debris on U.S. coasts and identifying the sources of the
debris. EPA is  partnering with the Center for Marine
Conservation (CMC) on this project. Summarized data
sets are available  on CMC's web  site at http://
www.cmc-ocean.org/nmdmp  and are user friendly
for local, state, regional, and nationwide stakeholders.

    EPA conducted an internal evaluation of regional
oversight of state NPDES programs in Regions 3 and
4. These internal reports recommended that the regions
build consistency in resolving issues by using tools such
as central tenets listing  conditions for permit
disapproval, time lines for comment and response, staff
training and support, and tracking/management
systems.

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS OF FY 2000
PERFORMANCE ON FY 2001 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE PLAN

    FY 2001  performance  goals and measures will
continue to evolve, reflecting EPAs increasing ability
to measure and/or represent water quality  and its
contributions to human health and healthy  aquatic
ecosystems, as well as its value as a natural resource.
For example, in FY 2001 EPA will report for the first
time on the increased number of whole watersheds
whose assessed waters largely meet designated uses.
FY 2001 measures will display the continuing progress
being made in maintaining the population served by
water systems receiving safe drinking water (even as
systems  incorporate new health-based standards). The
Agency has met its  FY 2000 performance goal of
another two million people receiving the benefits of
secondary treatment  (see Annual Performance Goal
(APG) # 16), so that nearly all of the population served
by publicly owned treatment works receive the benefits
of secondary treatment or better. Beginning in 2001,
EPA will report the number of CWSRF projects funded
as a performance measure. In addition EPA expects in
2001  to increase  the number  of waters for which
TMDLs  have been developed  and to increase the
number of updated water quality standards.
    EPAs 2001 goals also reflect the fact that a complete
baseline of information for many programs is not yet
available, and that  a number of our most important
programs depend on significant voluntary efforts  on
the parts of states  and other partners. Targets for 2001
include increasing the percentage of waters assessed
for meeting water quality standards for designated uses,
waters assessed for the need for fish advisories,  and
beaches where monitoring and notification of the public
takes place. Resource constraints as well as overlapping   i-
or conflicting program requirements  mean that   G
meaningful monitoring and reporting remain challenges.   |
States and tribes increased their efforts in these areas   g>
in FY 2000, and EPA expects them to continue to   ^
                                                                                 FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                     11-21

-------
•a
o
    improve in 2001. EPA will  continue to work with
    partners to support better  standards  and testing,
    monitoring and reporting, and provision of the resulting
    information to the public quickly, clearly, and accurately.

    TABLES OF RESULTS

        The following tables   of results  includes
    performance results for the FY 2000 APGs that appear
    in Goal 2. In cases where the FY 2000 APG is associated
    with an  FY 1999 APG, the table includes the FY 1999
    APG below the FY 2000 APG for ease in comparing
    performance. Where applicable, the tables note cases
    where  FY 2000 APGs are supported  by  National
    Environmental Performance Partnership System Core
    Performance Measures (CPMs). As described in more
    detail in Section I of the report (the Overview and
    Analysis), states use  CPMs to evaluate their progress
    toward  mutual program goals. Additionally, EPA is
    providing information on FY 1999 APGs for which
    data was not available when the FY 1999 report was
    published as well as those FY 1999 APGs that are not
    associated with any APGs in FY 2000.
11-22     EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
                                        FY 2000 Annual Report
                    Annual Performance Goals and Measures - Table of Results
I Summary FY 2000 Performance |
 8'   I Goals I o I Goals   I n|
    ..„.   \f. L,_.._.   U
                                     GOAL 2 - CLEAN AND SAFE WATER
        FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                      FY 2000
                                                                                 Planned    Actual
                                                                                                      FY 1999
                                                                                                       Actual
   BY 2005, PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH SO THAT 95% OF THE POPULATION SERVED BY COMMUNITY WATER
      SYSTEMS WILL RECEIVE WATER THAT MEETS DRINKING WATER STANDARDS, CONSUMPTION OF
   CONTAMINATED FISH AND SHELLFISH WILL BE REDUCED, AND EXPOSURE TO MICROBIAL AND OTHER
            FORMS OF CONTAMINATION IN WATERS USED FOR RECREATION WILL BE REDUCED.
FY 2000 APG 9:   91% of the population served by community drinking water systems
                will receive drinking water meeting all health-based standards that were
                in effect as of 1994, up from 83% in 1994.  •> Corresponds with FY 2000
                NEPPS Core Performance Measure.

(FY 1999)        89% (increase of 1% over 1998) of the population served by community
                water systems will receive drinking water meeting all health-based standards
                in effect as of 1994, up from 83% in 1994.

Explanation:     Goal met.

Data Source:     The Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) serves as the central
                repository for data on  both the states' implementation of and compliance with
                existing and new drinking water regulations. States and EPA regions (for
                "direct implementation" jurisdictions) enter data representing public water
                systems characteristics and drinking water monitoring into the SDWIS
                database.

Data Quality:     SDWIS has a full suite of software-based edit checks and quality assurance
                procedures to aid accurate data entry. However, there are recurrent reports
                of discrepancies between national and state  data bases, as well as specific
                mis-identifications reported by individual utilities. Given the particular need
                for confidence in the completeness and accuracy of data about drinking water
                quality, EPA designated SDWIS content as an Agency material weakness in
                1999, under the Federal  Managers' Financial Integrity Act.
                                                                                   91%
                                                                                             91%
                                                                                                        91%
FY 2000 APG 10:  Reduce exposure to contaminated recreational waters by increasing
                the information available to the public and decision-makers.

Performance Measures
 -  Cumulative number of beaches for which monitoring and closure data is available at
   "beaches" web-page.
 -  Number of digitized maps on the web-page.

Explanation:     Goal  met. The additional electronic information enables the public to
                precisely locate beach closings, reducing exposure to contaminated
                recreational waters.

Data Source:     The National Health  Protection Survey of Beaches Information Management
                System database.

Data Quality:     Self-reported data for public use; participation is voluntary and presently
                incomplete. Therefore no rigorous quality assurance requirements are in
                place. Inconsistencies between different reporting jurisdictions are possible.
                                                                                                        No
                                                                                                      FY 1999
                                                                                                       APG
                                                                                    1,800

                                                                                     150
1,981

 150
                                                                                        FY 2000 GPRA Perfomance
                                                                                                              11-23

-------

FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES

FY 2000 APG 1 1 : Reduce uncertainties and improve methods associated with the
evaluation and control of risks posed by exposure to disinfection
by-products (DBFs) in drinking water.
(FY 1999) EPA will develop critical dose-response data for disinfection by-products
(DBFs), water-borne pathogens, and arsenic for addressing key uncertainties
in the risk assessment of municipal water supplies.
Performance Measures
- Report regarding feasibility of refined DBP exposure data for previous epidemiological studies.
- Report on new DBFs from alternative disinfectants.
- Final peer-reviewed report on selected DBP mixtures' toxicological endpoints.
Explanation: Goal met. EPA completed methods for improving the interpretation of data
from published DBP epidemiology studies, and reports that provide important
information about new DBPs in drinking water, and the risks that may be
posed by exposures to mixtures of these contaminants.
Data Source: Agency generated material.
Data Quality: As required by the Agency-wide formal peer review policy issued in 1993,
and reaffirmed in 1994 and 1998, all major scientific and technical work
products used in Agency decision making are independently peer reviewed
before their use. EPA has implemented a rigorous process of peer review for
both its in-house and extramural research programs. Peer review panels
include scientists and engineers from academia, industry, and other federal
agencies.
FY 2000 APG 12: Reduce uncertainties and improve methods associated with the
evaluation and control of risks posed by exposure to microbial
contaminants in drinking water.
(FY 1999) EPA will develop critical dose-response data for disinfection by-products
(DBPs), water-borne pathogens, and arsenic for addressing key uncertainties
in the risk assessment of municipal water supplies.
Performance Measures
- Describe different technologies of cost/effective control of Cryptosporidium and DBPs.
- Report on U. S. waterborne disease outbreaks.
- Evaluation of Method 1622 for Cryptosporidium.
Explanation: Goal met. EPA completed reports on the nature and magnitude of waterborne
disease outbreaks in the United States during 1997-1998 and on an
evaluation of a key method for the identification of Cryptosporidium in
drinking water, directly helping to reduce uncertainties and improve methods
associated with the evaluation and control of risks posed by exposure to
microbial contaminants in drinking water. A project to evaluate cost-effective
treatment methods for Cryptosporidium and DBPs was not completed due to
insufficient time being allotted for the completion of this research. However,
EPA completed complementary projects, such as a research progress report
on biofilm (microbial communities growing on the confining surfaces of a
distribution system) formation and control which will provide useful
information on protecting distribution systems. In this way EPA appreciably
met the performance goal.
Data Source: Same as FY 2000 APG 1 1 .
Data Quality: Same as FY 2000 APG 1 1 .
FY 2000


Planned







1
1
1



















9/30/00
1
1
















Actual







1
1
1




















1
1















FY 1999


Actual



9/30/99





















9/30/99





















11-24
             EPA's FY2000 Annual Report

-------
     FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                         FY 2000
                                                                                    Planned    Actual
                   FY 1999
                   Actual
               CONSERVE AND ENHANCE THE ECOLOGICAL HEALTH OF THE NATION'S (STATE, INTERSTATE,
AND TRIBAL) WATERS AND AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS-RIVERS AND STREAMS, LAKES, WETLANDS, ESTUARIES,
    COASTAL AREAS, OCEANS, AND GROUNDWATER-SOTHAT 75% OF WATERS WILL SUPPORT HEALTHY
                                       AQUATIC COMMUNITIES BY 2005.
FY 2000 APG 13:   Environmental improvement projects will be underway in 350 high
                 priority watersheds as a result of implementing activities under Clean
                 Water Action Plan (CWAP).

(FY 1999)         As part of the CWAP, all states will be conducting or have completed unified
                 watershed assessments, with support from EPA, to identify aquatic resources
                 in greatest need of restoration or prevention activities.

Explanation:      Goal not met. Environmental improvement projects underway in 324 high
                 priority watersheds,  which is slightly short of EPA's ambitious goal. The goal
                 is for FY 2000 only, to be superseded in FY 2001  by a direct measure of the
                 number of large-scale watersheds showing improvements in water quality.

Data Source:      Internal Agency count.

Data Quality:      There are no data quality issues.
350
          324
                    56
FY 2000 APG 14:   Assure that states and tribes have effective, up-to-date water quality
                 standards programs adopted in accordance with the Water Quality
                 Standards regulation and the Water Quality Standards (WQSs) program
                 priorities.

Performance Measures
 -  Number of states with new or revised WQSs that EPA either approved, or disapproved ,and
   promulgated replacements.
 -  Cumulative number of tribes with approved WQSs in place.

Explanation:      Goal not met. State WQS reviews are under a 3-year cycle, as mandated by
                 the Clean Water Act, under which all states maintain updated water quality
                 programs; therefore, the Agency will review approximately one-third of all
                 state/tribal programs each year. Fewer tribes than expected have achieved
                 "treatment as a state" status, which is a pre-condition for being approved to
                 run a WQS program. EPA is committed to improving the Agency's review and
                 approval process for "treatment as a state" to address this barrier. In FY 2001
                 EPA expects to implement a Memorandum of Agreement with the U.S. Fish
                 and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service to greatly
                 improve the timeliness and effectiveness of cross-agency coordination in the
                 WQS  review and approval process. EPA will also provide additional technical
                 assistance to tribes to help them develop better WQSs.

Data Source:      Same as FY 2000 APG 13.

Data Quality:      Same as FY 2000 APG 13.
                    No
                  FY 1999
                    APG
15

22
35

16
FY 2000 APG 15:   Identify the primary life support functions of surface waters that
                 contribute to the management of sustainability of watersheds.

(FY 1999)         EPA will provide data and information for use by states and Regions in
                 assessing and managing aquatic stressors in the watershed, to reduce toxic
                 loadings and improve ecological risk assessment.

Performance Measure
 -  Research strategy document to determine the impact of landscape changes on wetland
   structure and function.

Explanation:      Goal met. The completed work evaluated specific habitats such as wetlands,
                 riparian areas, headwaters, and estuaries to determine their basic function
                 and role in the landscape. This information will allow EPA to determine what
                 makes these habitats critical and will provide a basis for prioritizing protection
                 and restoration  decisions.
                   9/30/99
                                I
                                                                                                 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                                   11-25

-------
             FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                                   FY 2000
                                                                                              Planned    Actual
                                                                                          FY 1999
                                                                                           Actual
        Data Source:

        Data Quality:
Same as FY 2000 APG 11.

Same as FY 2000 APG 11.
        BY 2005, POLLUTANT DISCHARGES FROM KEY POINT SOURCES AND NONPOINT SOURCE RUNOFF WILL BE
        REDUCED BY AT LEAST 20% FROM 1992 LEVELS. AIR DEPOSITION OF KEY POLLUTANTS IMPACTING WATER
                                                  BODIES WILL BE REDUCED.
        FY 2000 APG 16:   Another two million people will receive the benefits of secondary
                         treatment of wastewater, for a total of 181 million people.

        (FY 1999)         Another 3.4 million people will receive the benefits of secondary treatment of
                         wastewater, for a total of 179 million.

        Explanation:      Goal met. Currently nearly all of the nation's population is served by publicly
                         owned treatment works with secondary treatment or better.

        Data Source:      Manual system. Extracted from EPA databases including the Clean Water
                         Needs Survey Database and the Permits Compliance System.

        Data Quality:      Data are manually verified.
                                                                                                2M
                                                                                  2M
                                                                                           3.4 M
        FY 2000 APG 17:   Industrial discharges of pollutants to the nation's waters will be
                         significantly reduced through implementation of effluent guidelines.

        Performance Measures
        -  Cumulative reduction in toxic-pollutant loadings by facilities subject to effluent guidelines
           promulgated  between 1992-1999, against 1992 levels (predicted by models).
        -  Cumulative reduction in conventional-pollutant loadings by facilities subject to effluent
           guidelines promulgated between 1992-1999, against 1992 levels (predicted by models).
        -  Cumulative reduction in non-conventional-pollutant loadings by facilities subject to effluent
           guidelines promulgated between 1992-1999, against 1992 levels (predicted by models).

        Explanation:      Goal met. EPA substantially met the goal of reducing industrial discharges of
                         the three classes of pollutants. Targets were based on model projections of
                         effluent guidelines, having to estimate both the facility universe and the
                         number of permits developed. The actual number of issued permits in
                         different industry sectors resulted in greater than expected  reductions in
                         conventional pollutants, and less than expected reductions  in
                         non-conventional pollutants.

        Data Source:      The Permit Compliance System (PCS) is the principle compliance tracking
                         system governing EPA's supervision of the National Pollutant Discharge
                         Elimination System (NPDES) permit program. It contains data from EPA and
                         states on Wastewater  facility NPDES permits.

        Data Quality:      Ongoing quality action/quality control safeguards include EPA review of state
                         databases that serve as key data sources. However, there are known
                         inconsistencies between state/federal records, particularly for minor facilities,
                         and previous EPA Office of Inspector General audits have discussed the
                         need for fresher data.  EPA is engaged in a major modernization of the PCS
                         system and databases.
                                                                                             No
                                                                                           FY 1999
                                                                                            APG
                                                                     4Mlbs


                                                                     385 M Ibs

                                                                     260 M Ibs
 4Mlbs


473 M Ibs

136 MIbs
        FY 2000 APG 18:   Develop modeling, monitoring, and risk management methods that
                         enable planners and regulatory officials to more accurately characterize
                         receiving and recreational water quality and to select appropriate
                         control technologies.

        (FY 1999)         By 2003: Deliver support tools, such as watershed models, enabling resource
                         planners to select consistent, appropriate watershed management solutions
                         and alternative, less costly wet-weather flow control technologies.

        Performance Measure
        -  Link urban storm water management models to a Geographic Information System (GIS).
                                                                                           Target
                                                                                           year is
                                                                                          FY 2003
11-26
          EPA's FY2000 Annual Report

-------
FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Explanation: Goal met. EPA met this goal by completing research linking urban storm
water management models to a geographic information system, which will
assist in the development of improved safety guidelines and pollution
indicators that states, local municipalities, and tribes can use to monitor
recreational waters in a cost-effective way. Improving the characterization of
recreational water quality will provide important input to the development of
guidance in state, tribal, and local implementation of beach monitoring and
notification programs designed to reduce human exposure to waterborne
microbials and protect the public health.
Data Source: Same as FY 2000 APG 1 1 .
Data Quality: Same as FY 2000 APG 1 1 .
FY 2000
Planned

Actual

FY 1999
Actual

                            FY 1999 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS
                             (NO LONGER REPORTED FOR FY 2000)
EPA will issue and begin implementing two protective drinking water standards for high-risk contaminants, including
disease-causing micro-organisms (Stage I  Disinfection/Disinfection By-products and Interim  Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rules).

4,400 community water systems will be implementing programs to protect their source water (an increase of 1,650
systems over 1998).

EPA will provide funding to restore wetlands and river corridors in 30 watersheds that meet specific "Five Star Project"
criteria relating to diverse community partnerships (for a cumulative total of 44 watersheds).

More than 220 communities will have local  watersheds improved by controls on combined sewer overflows (CSO) and
storm water.

In support of the Clean Water Action Plan,  ten additional states will upgrade their nonpoint source programs, to ensure
that they are implementing dynamic and effective nonpoint source programs that are designed to achieve and maintain
beneficial uses of water.
                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                              GPRA Performance
                                                                                                                 11-27

-------
   Goal 3 FY 2000 Obligations
              $75M
                                                 GOAL 3: SAFE FOOD
                                 The foods Americans eat will be free from unsafe pesticide
                               residues. Children especially will be protected from the health
                              threats posed by pesticide residues because they are among the
                                            most vulnerable groups in our society.
    Note: EPA FY 2000 Obligations
        were $8,974 million
OVERVIEW

    Americans have one of the safest, most abundant,
and affordable food supplies in the world as a result of
work done by federal, state, and local governments to
manage and control the risk posed to human health by
pesticide residues on food. The use  of pesticides in
agricultural production and food processing contributes
significantly to that safety, abundance, and affordability.
Ensuring that food remains  safe for consumption,
however, requires  constant diligence on the part of
pesticide producers, users, and regulatory agencies in
the manufacture, labeling, storage, review, approval, and
use of pesticides. EPA continues to protect the nation's
food supply by reviewing all new and existingpesticides,
making determinations about their safety, and denying
or restricting the use of pesticides that do  not meet
current health or ecological standards.

    The Agency addresses  risk from pesticides when it
registers new pesticides or reregisters older pesticides,
ensuring that each  pesticide meets current health and
environmental protection  standards  and that product
labeling  includes  complete,  up-to-date,  easily
understandable use instructions and precautions. The
reregistration  program reevaluates the safety of
pesticides initially registered before November  1984.
To mitigate risk in cases  where data indicate  that a
pesticide does  not meet current human health and
environmental standards, EPA can modify or restrict
the allowable uses,  including canceling use or allowing
use only by a certified applicator or under supervision
of a certified applicator.
    In  FY 2000 protection of infants,  children, and
other vulnerable groups remained a high priority for
the Agency. EPA applies an extra tenfold safety factor
(for food use pesticides) in risk assessments to account
for children's special vulnerabilities, unless scientific data
indicate  that  a different factor is warranted, and
considers special dietary patterns of groups such as
Native Americans, urban poor, and farm families. The
Agency is continuing to update and improve its pesticide
toxicity testing guidelines and other assessment tools.
    In FY 2000 the  Agency made  further progress
toward its strategic goal through  a combination of
regulatory, outreach, and partnership activities, including
the following:  (1) continuing to register new pesticides
and reregister existing pesticides, emphasizing
revaluation of existingpesticides that pose the greatest
health risks, and accelerating the registration of lower-
risk alternatives; (2) training  and educating pesticide
users  and applicators; and (3)  encouraging the
development and adoption of alternative means of pest
control, including the use of nonchemical approaches
and lower-risk pesticides.

FY 2000 PERFORMANCE

Reducing Agricultural Pesticide Risk
    Approximately 20,000 pesticides  products are
currently registered or licensed for use  in the United
States. Pesticide products are used in or on food, around
homes, businesses, schools, hospitals,  and in parks.
Before EPA registers a pesticide product for sale and
use, the  Agency evaluates test data  on all of  its
ingredients. The test data, which include studies on the
effects the product will have on humans, wildlife, fish,
and plants (including endangered species), are provided
by the registration applicant (known as the registrant).
Depending on the  type of pesticide, a registrant may
be required to generate data from as  many as 100
different  tests in order for the Agency to determine the
product's safety.
                                                                                   FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                       11-29

-------
        EPA  is developing and evaluating improved
    methods to estimate human exposure to and risk from
    pesticides. The Agency has made considerable progress
    in improving its risk assessments by incorporating the
    latest scientific methods. For example during FY 2000
    EPA published for public comment 14 draft or revised
    science guidelines and policy papers that describe how
    EPA  scientists will  evaluate aggregate exposure,
    cumulative risk, and other  science policy issues when
    they assess pesticides under the Food Quality Protection
    Act (FQPA). The  Agency  also convened the  Federal
    Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
    Scientific Advisory Panel six times to consult on these
    subjects with external scientists. Additionally the Agency
    consulted with stakeholders  through  the Tolerance
    Reassessment Advisory Committee and  the new
    Committee to Advise on Reassessments  and Transition,
    held a public technical meeting on cumulative risk, and
    held several public meetings  on individual chemicals.
    Broadening stakeholder input helps  the Agency gain
    cooperation from industry and growers in developing
    and implementing reduced risk agricultural practices.

        Recognizing the need to develop methods that
    directly measure or reliably estimate these risks on a
    national or regional basis,  EPA must currently use a
    variety of program activities as surrogate indicators of
    progress, one of which is the processing of registration
    applications. The Agency, in partnership with Florida
    State  University, is working to develop a strategy for
    building baseline  data  and national environmental
    indicators with the ultimate goal of replacing the
    surrogate indicators of progress with those that reflect
    health effects associated with pesticides. The strategy
    document is expected during FY 2002.

        EPA identified and solicited public comment on
    several new program progress indicators, including food
    pesticide residue data collected by the U.S. Department
    of Agriculture (USDA) to track reductions in the
    occurrence of residues of neurotoxic and carcinogenic
    pesticides on foods frequently eaten by children. Such
    indicators will  help EPA to  better target its  limited
    resources to obtain the best results.

        EPA completed 13 pesticide registrations for several
    reduced-risk pesticides. Pesticide usage data indicate that
    increased availability of lower-risk pesticides, combined
    with public demand for safe food, encourages pesticide
    producers and users to shift to reduced-risk alternatives.
  REDUCING RISK THROUGH REGISTRATION OF
           REDUCED-RISK PESTICIDES

  Harpin Protein. This biopesticide has the potential
  to be an important human health and environmental
  risk reduction tool. Harpin  is  a class of protein
  produced naturally. It triggers  the plant's natural
  defense mechanism rather than directly interacting
  with  the pest organism. For this reason, organisms
  are not expected to develop  resistance to Harpin.
  Harpin is effective against certain viral diseases for
  which there are no other controls. It also protects
  against soil-borne pathogens  and pests (nematodes
  and fungi) that have few potential controls other than
  methyl bromide, an ozone-depleting chemical.
  Approved uses include all food  commodities, trees,
  turf, and ornamentals.
  New Uses  for Spinosad and Glyphosate. During
  FY 2000 EPA staff collaborated with USDA to design
  a more efficient strategy for developing and applying
  residue data needed to establish tolerances for the
  reduced-risk chemicals Spinosad and Glyphosate on
  more than 200 crops, including many children's foods.
  This effort cut data development time by 2 to 3 years
  for many of these uses, allowing EPA to register the
  additional uses of these two lower-risk pesticides in
  FY 2000. These changes also resulted in a direct
  savings of $1 million to the federally and state-funded
  program that developed the  data. Through these
  streamlined  registration actions, more than 150 crops
  may now be treated with Spinosad and approximately
  250 crops may now be  treated with  Glyphosate
  instead of other, higher-risk pesticides.
As the use of reduced-risk alternatives increases, they
may also become more affordable.

    Because of public concern over various aspects of
biotechnology (e.g., pest resistance, allergens, genetic
alteration), EPA began a scientific and public review
of the  current  registrations for certain genetically
engineered corn and cotton  varieties,  commonly
referred to as Bt corn and Bt cotton. The Agency also
extended the existing registrations of Bt cotton and Bt
corn plant pesticides until September 30,2001, to allow
ample  time for this  comprehensive review; EPA will
use this comprehensive approach  to  ensure that
decisions are based on the best available scientific
analysis and that opportunity is provided for an open
11-30
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
dialogue with the public regarding Bt products.  To
ensure that all viewpoints are represented, EPA will
seek input from the public from the FIFRA Science
Advisory Panel, and through a review being led jointly
by the Council on Environmental Quality and the White
House Office of Science and Technology Policy. In
addition in FY 2000 the Agency worked diligently to
finalize the plant pesticide rule. EPA believes that  the
rule, first proposed in 1994, will clarify the status of
plant-incorporated protectants  under FIFRA. Plant
incorporated protectants  can  serve as lower risk
alternatives to conventional pesticides used on foods.
The final rule, expected in FY 2001, will reflect careful
consideration of all public comments and relevant
scientific data.

Reducing Use on Food of Pesticides Not Meeting
Health Standards
    Since  1988  EPA has  been  conducting a
comprehensive review of the risks associated with
pesticides initially registered before November 1,1984.
In  FY 1996  FQPA added  a new dimension to  the
pesticide reregistration  program. Under FQPA, EPA
evaluates pesticides  to assess  whether use  of  the
pesticides in accordance with their label instructions
presents "reasonable certainty  of no  harm." After
completing a review and ensuring that the pesticide does
not present human or environmental health threats,  the
Agency  issues a Reregistration Eligibility Decision
(RED).  In cases where the  reviews  indicate that
pesticides do  not  meet health  and environmental
Progress in Reassessing Pesticide Tolerances as of September 30, 2000
 100
  90
  80
  70
!  60
I
I  50
  40
  30
  20
  10
   0
1186







505













376







169













203








50












1215






683














3190





















6170






3551



    Organophosphates Carbamates  Organochlorines Carcinogens
                                                    requirements, EPA can modify the allowable uses of
                                                    pesticides, including canceling use or limiting use to
                                                    certified  applicators. FQPA also sets stricter safety
                                                    standards for pesticide residues in or on food and it
                                                    requires EPA to reassess all existing tolerances within
                                                    10 years to ensure they meet the new safety standard.
                                                       In FY 2000 EPA continued to reduce human health
                                                    risks (through substitution of these chemicals with safer
                                                    pesticides, tolerance reassessments, and reregistration)
                                                    from organophosphates and other high-risk pesticides,
                                                    such  as organochlorines, carcinogens, and carbamates.
                                                    Because organophosphates are widely used, accounting
                                                    for more than half of all food crop insecticides used in
                                                    the United States, and can adversely affect the human
                                                    nervous system, EPA views the reassessment of these
                                                    products  as  a major step in  risk reduction. EPA is
                                                    committed to ensuring a safe and abundant food supply
                                                    for Americans and recognizes that restricting use of
                                                    widely used  pesticides in the  absence of appropriate
                                                    alternatives could compromise this commitment. In
                                                    FY 2000  the Agency worked in collaboration with
                                                    USDA to obtain  a broad range of stakeholder and
                                                    public  comments on its risk  assessments  for the
                                                    organophosphate  pesticides. EPA also held a number
                                                    of open, public technical briefings to communicate risk
                                                    concerns  and obtain the views of stakeholders.
                                                       EPA  made substantial progress in reviewing
                                                    individual organophosphates and carbamate pesticides
                                                    and characterizing their risks.  The  six REDs EPA
                                                    completed in FY 2000  incorporate various  risk-
                                                    reduction measures, such as allowing use of certain
                                                                              products only by certified
                                                                              applicators,  canceling
                                                                              pesticide products  or
                                                                              deleting uses, limiting the
                                                                              amount or frequency of
                                                                              use, requiring additional
                                                                              personal protective equip-
                                                                              ment or  other worker
                                                                              protection measures for
                                                                              applicators   such   as
                                                                              improving use directions
                                                                              and precautions, and/or
                                                                              employing groundwater or
                                                                              surface water protection.
                                                       Others
                                                                   TOTAL
                                                Completed
                     I     | Remaining     L
Status of the EPA's tolerance reassessment program, by chemical class. In total, 3, 551 tolerances
(37% out of a total of 9,721) have been reassessed. Thus EPA is more than one-third complete
with progress on reassessing tolerances, including high-risk chemicals such as organophosphates,
carbamates, organochlorines, and carcinogens.
                                                                                     FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                         11-31

-------
       RISK MITIGATION ON ORGANOPHOSPHATES

      Chlorpyrifos.  EPA  reached an agreement with
      pesticide manufacturers to eliminate and phase  out
      certain uses of the organophoshate chlorpyrifos—
      the active ingredient in Dursban, one of the most
      heavily used household insecticides. This agreement
      will significantly reduce risk from food and residential
      uses, particularly to children. The agreement lowers
      or revokes tolerances on apples, tomatoes, and
      grapes; classifies new end-use products as restricted
      use; and reduces drinking water risk through phaseout
      or cancellation of most indoor/outdoor residential
      uses, which are major contributors to drinking water
      contamination.

      Bensulide.   EPA's  review of bensulide, an
      organophosphate herbicide used on vegetable crops,
      ornamentals, and turf, found that dietary risk from
      residues on food was low but that aggregate risk could
      be  significant when potential drinking water
      exposures  through  runoff from turf applications
      were considered. EPA worked to mitigate the risk
      of bensulide by prohibiting handheld application
      methods and treatment of large turf areas, adopting
      label changes, and restricting the number and timing
      of golf course applications.
        Regulation of antimicrobial pesticides is another
    arena in which EPA contributes to ensuring the safety
    of America's food supply. During FY 2000 the Agency
    convened an interagency panel to review a procedure
    for evaluating the  efficacy of consumer products
    intended to control disease-carrying organisms on fresh
    fruits and vegetables. EPA also initiated a review of
    procedures to evaluate the efficacy of antimicrobial
    agents claimed to reduce the number of disease-carrying
    organisms in food processing, water, and in air. Other
    ongoing efforts related to antimicrobial pesticides
    include work with stakeholder groups  and  scientific
    experts  to (1) develop  performance  standards and
    efficacy tests  for registering treated articles (such as
    cutting boards, kitchen sponges, cat litter, toothbrushes,
    and toys) associated with human health claims and (2)
    refine registration  requirements and  performance
    standards for products that claim to control human
    pathogens in  medical  waste. EPA's investments in
    expanded outreach and communication concerning
    antimicrobial  pesticides have proven  invaluable in
    providing up-to-date information to the public in
instances like the FY 2000  recall of certain cleaning
products found to cause respiratory symptoms in some
users.  The  National Antimicrobial Information
Network, which provides a wide variety of information
about  antimicrobials through a toll-free telephone
number (1-800-447-6349) and the Internet (http://
www.ace.orst.edu/info/nain/), is an example of the
communication tools available.

SUMMARY OF FY 2000  PERFORMANCE

    Through successful,  collaborative integration of
regulatory, outreach, and partnership activities, EPA
made progress in ensuring that food is free from unsafe
pesticide  residues,  especially where  children  are
concerned. The Agency continued using the best
available science in the  review of new and existing
pesticides. EPA also  continued to expedite  the
registration of reduced-risk pesticides and to review
the highest-risk existing pesticides first, canceling or
otherwise restricting use of pesticides that do not meet
the current health standards. Additionally the Agency
encouraged  greater public awareness  about  the
precautions people should take in the  proper
preparation and handling of food. These actions played
an important part in moving the Agency toward its
strategic goal to improve  food safety.

RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS

    In  FY 2000 EPA conducted research to develop
and improve methods and models that predict, estimate,
and measure health effects resulting from exposure to
pesticides. Developing improved methods to detect,
characterize, and quantify pesticide exposures in infants,
children, and other susceptible  subpopulations is an
important focus of this research.  The  FQPA  has
expanded EPA's pesticide risk  assessment research,
particularly  in the  area of evaluating aggregate
exposures to pesticides from multiple sources and the
cumulative risk posed by multiple pesticides that share
a common mechanism of toxicity. In FY 2000 research
centered on providing methods and models to evaluate
the risk to human health posed by food-use products.
One of the most important activities was the revision
of a first generation, multimedia, multipathway pesticide
exposure model that  identifies critical exposure
pathways and factors for infants and young children.
Future research  will  continue to focus  on  the
development of risk assessment methods and  models
11-32
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
for susceptible populations, but will also include  a
greater emphasis on the development of new exposure
and effects data to address the key issues and science
needs of cumulative risk.

PROGRAM EVALUATION

    The General Accounting Office (GAO) assessed
how EPA protects children's health and addresses their
special vulnerability to pesticides in the report Children
and Pesticides: New Approach to Considering Risk Is Partly in
Place (HEHS-00-175). This investigation addressed the
progress EPA has made in considering aggregate
exposure and the cumulative effects of pesticides, as
well as the progress made in reassessing tolerances for
pesticide residues. GAO found that EPA has put in
place interim procedures to address aggregate exposure
and that methods for addressing cumulative risk are
being developed. When complete, the methods will be
implemented  on a group of chemicals considered to
be of potentially high risk. To address GAO concerns,
EPA is giving special attention to the foods children
most frequently eat (http://www.gao.gov).
applied to the evaluation of other high-risk pesticides
in FY2001. The FQPA requirement to address the
cumulative risk of all pesticides  sharing a  common
mechanism of toxicity will continue to affect EPAs
tolerance assessment completions in FY 2001. In
addition, the Agency is revising its 2001/2002 targets
upwards for several registration outputs to better reflect
process improvements made since 1997.

TABLES OF RESULTS

    The  following  tables  of  results  includes
performance results for the two FY 2000  Congressional
APGs that appear in Goal 3. In cases where the FY 2000
APG is associated with a FY 1999  APG,  the table
includes the FY 1999 APG below the FY 2000 APG
for ease in comparing performance.
ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS OF FY 2000
PERFORMANCE ON FY 2001 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE PLAN

    The Agency's  FY 2000  target  for tolerance
reassessments was not met due in part to the continuing
development of the cumulative risk methodology. The
Agency has already done a substantial amount of work
on many tolerances but cannot call the  tolerances fully
reassessed because of the pending development of the
Agency's cumulative risk policy. Once  the cumulative
risk policy has been approved (expected by the end of
FY 2001)  and applied to the tolerance reassessment
process, the Agency expects to increase the pace of
tolerance  reassessments. Therefore the Agency will
revise its FY 2002 Annual Performance Goal  (APG)
for tolerance reassessment upward so that the Agency
will be on  track to meet the statutory  requirement of
66 percent of existing tolerances reassessed by 2002.
The Committee to Advise on Reassessments and
Transition, which began in FY 2000, will continue to
add diverse stakeholder input to EPAs decision-making
process. Lessons learned from the organophosphate
pesticide reviewprocess, particularly the need for better
data and collaboration  among stakeholders, will be
                                                                                FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                    11-33

-------
                                                   FY 2000 Annual Report
                             Annual Performance Goals and Measures - Table of Results
       I Summary FY 2000 Performance I
        I -t I Goals  I -t I Goals    I A I
        I ' JlVlet   LLlNotMet   LrJOther]
GOAL 3 -  SAFE FOOD
                 FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                               Planned    Actual
                                                             Actual
                      BY 2005, THE RISK FROM AGRICULTURAL USE OF PESTICIDES WILL BE REDUCED
                                              BY 50 PERCENT FROM 1995 LEVELS.
        FY 2000 APG 19:  Decrease adverse risk from agricultural uses from 1995 levels and
                         assure that new pesticides are safe by such actions as registering
                         6 new chemicals, 2,200 amendments, 600 me-toos, 200 new uses,
                         45 inerts, 375 special registrations, 225* tolerances and 13 reduced risk
                         chemicals/biopesticides.

        (FY 1999)         Decrease adverse risk from agricultural pesticides from 1995 levels and
                         assure new pesticides that enter the market are safe for humans and the
                         environment.

        Explanation:      Goal met. Pending availability of improved indicators, the Agency uses the
                         processing of registration applications as surrogate measures. In partnership
                         with Florida State University, the Agency is refining environmental indicators
                         for pesticide programs and is analyzing ways to measure risk posed by
                         agricultural uses of pesticides. It is likely that the risk will be inferred by
                         examining usage levels of safer "reduced-risk" pesticides, using 1995 (pre-
                         Food Quality Protection Act) as a baseline. Revised perfomance indicator/
                         measure is expected in FY 2002.

                         'The APG for FY 2000 contained in the FY 2001 Congressional Justification
                         erroneously included 105 tolerances, yet indicated 225 tolerances as the
                         planned performance measure target for 2000. The correct number of
                         tolerances for the 2000 APG is 225. In this report,  EPA is referencing 225
                         tolerances, as written in the FY 2001 Congressional Justification as a
                         performance measure target for 2000.

        Data Source:      The Pesticide Regulatory Action Tracking System is designed to collect and
                         track information submitted by the regulated industry to support a pesticide
                         registration application.

                         The Tolerance Index System (TIS) contains information  on current tolerances,
                         crop residues by crop and crop group for food and feed use.

        Data Quality:      EPA conducts internal senior management reviews of data contained in
                         pesticide tracking systems. EPA is developing two  databases: (1) Office of
                         Pesticide Program Information Network (OPPIN) to consolidate pesticide data
                         into one system and (2) the National Pesticide Residue  Database (NPRD), in
                         conjunction with the Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Department of
                         Agriculture, and the states of California and  Florida, to automate validation of
                         data submissions. The NPRD is being created in response to a
                         recommendation by the National Academy of Science (NAS) Report
                         Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children, 1993. The report provided the
                         findings by NAS National Research Council  Committee  on its examination of
                         the adequacy of present risk assessment methods and  policies and
                         toxicologic issues of most concern to children. One of the findings was that
                         there was no comprehensive data source on pesticide residue levels in the
                         major foods consumed by infants and children. The purpose of the database
                         is to have a single national repository of pesticide  residue monitoring data
                         with consistent/standardized reporting of data.
•a
o
                                          6
                                        2,200
                                        600
                                        200
                                         45
                                        375
                                        225
                                         13
  6
3,069
1,106
 427
 95
 458
 452
 16
  7
3,586
1,022
 681
 109
 455
 351
 19
11-34
          EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------

FY 9nnn ANNIIAI PFRFORMANPF fiOAi ^ AND MFA^IIRF^
i I Ł.\J\J\J nMMUnL. rdir WrilVlnM wC VJIWHLO /AMU IVICnOUriCO
FY 2000

Planned
Actual
FY 1999

Actual
BY 2005, USE ON FOOD OF CURRENT PESTICIDES THAT DO NOT MEET THE NEW STATUTORY STANDARD OF
"REASONABLE CERTAINTY OF NO HARM" WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY ELIMINATED.
FY 2000 APG 20: EPA will reassess 20% of the existing 9,721 tolerances to ensure that
they meet the statutory standard of "reasonable certainty of no harm."
(FY 1999) Under pesticide reregistration, EPA will reassess 19% (or 1,850) of the
existing 9,700 tolerances (cumulative 33%) for pesticides food uses to meet
the new statutory standards of "reasonable certainty of no harm. "
Explanation: Goal not met. As of September 2000, the Agency had completed 3,430 (or
35%) of the statutorily mandated 9,721 tolerances. Despite the FY 2000
performance, the Agency expects to meet the Food Quality Protection Act
(FQPA) August 3, 2002 statutory deadline of 66% of tolerances reassessed
(6,415) and 100% assessed by August 2006. Although the actual results are
less than the targets, the Agency has already done a substantial amount of
work on many tolerances. However, the Agency cannot call the tolerances
fully reassessed because of the pending development of the Agency's
cumulative risk policy.
*ln FY 2000 EPA targeted the organophosphate pesicides (OPs) for
tolerance reassessment. Because the OPs share a common mechanism of
toxicity, a cumulative risk assessment across all of the OPs is required
before the reassessment of their tolerances is completed. This extra stage of
cumulative assessment was not needed for the tolerances reassessed in
FY 1999. The cumulative assessment requires that EPA establish a
cumulative risk policy, which has taken the Agency longer than first
anticipated. EPA now expects to issue that policy by the end of FY 2001 .
Following that the Agency will be able to complete the reassessment of all of
the OP tolerances, producing a surge of reassessments completed in
FY 2002. EPA is on schedule to meet the statutory deadline of 66% of all
tolerances reassessed by August 3, 2002.
Data Source: Same as FY 2000 APG 1 9.
Tolerance Reassessment Tracking System contains records on all 9,721
tolerances subject to reassessment from all sources. Data is extracted from
the TIS and contains the numbers of total tolerances reassessed and the
results of the reassessments (i.e., number of tolerance levels raised,
revoked, or decreased).
Data Quality: Same as FY 2000 APG 19.
1,250
































121*


































1,445






























                          I
GPRA Performance
                      11-35

-------
   Goal 4 FY 2000 Obligations
              $271M
                          GOAL 4: PREVENTING POLLUTION AND
                       REDUCING RISK IN COMMUNITIES, HOMES,
                              WORKPLACES AND ECOSYSTEMS
                           Pollution prevention and risk management strategies aimed at cost-
                              effectively eliminating, reducing, or minimizing emissions and
                           contamination will result in cleaner and safer environments in which
                            all Americans can reside, work, and enjoy life. EPA will safeguard
    Note: EPA FY2000 Obligations ecosystems and promote the health of natural communities that are
                                        integral to the quality of life in this nation.
were $8,974 million
OVERVIEW

   A preventive, multimedia approach, focusing on
potential risks to human health and the environment
from exposure to pesticides in homes, schools,
communities, workplaces, and the ecosystem, is central
to EPA's  strategy for protecting the public  and the
environment from the complex array of pollutants and
threats imposed by industrial  society. Preventing
pollution before it causes harm can be  cheaper and
smarter than cleaning it up afterward. Cooperative and
voluntary activities, including releasing data on the risks
posed by pesticides and industrial chemicals;
encouraging the use of safer alternative technologies,
               WEST NILE VIRUS

  In FY 2000 EPA addressed the potential threat to
  the public from mosquito-borne viruses such as the
  West Nile virus, which can cause
  encephalitis. In 1999 there were more
  than 60 reported cases of West Nile
  encephalitis and some deaths. EPA
  engaged in a broad, preemptive
  communication strategy to provide
  information on the risks and benefits
  of pesticide  applications  for
  mosquito control before and duringmajor outbreaks.
  Communication products were targeted to the public,
  states, localities, pesticide registrants, formulators,
  handlers, applicators, the U.S. Department of Health
  and Human Services, the  U.S. Department of
  Agriculture, environmental groups,  and other
  interested parties. EPA also ensured that states and
  localities applied pesticides according to proper
  application methods to protect the public  from
  pesticide exposure.
                                           chemicals, and farm practices; and promoting industrial
                                           processes that use less hazardous materials or recycle,
                                           are a vital part of EPA's pollution prevention strategy.
                                           In conducting these activities, EPA  emphasizes
                                           protecting children who can be more susceptible than
                                           adults to injury from exposure to  hazardous
                                           compounds. EPA's pollution prevention efforts involve
                                           many Agency programs, including those for pesticides,
                                           chemical management,  indoor  air pollution, waste
                                           management, and research. In addition many pollution
                                           prevention activities require sharing responsibilities with
                                           other federal, state, and tribal agencies, private industry,
                                           and nonprofit organizations. EPA's efforts with these
                                           partners have  led to reduced risk in communities,
                                           homes, workplaces, and ecosystems.

                                           FY 2000 PERFORMANCE

                                           Reducing Risk from Pesticides and Other
                                           Chemicals

                                              EPA made substantial progress during FY 2000 in
                                           reducing the risks posed by pesticides and other
                                           chemicals  by promoting  improved  pesticide
                                           management practices, implementing the lead hazard
                                           reduction program, and gaining commitments from
                                           industry to participate in the High Production Volume
                                           Challenge Program.
                                           Pesticides
                                              EPA worked with various pesticide user groups and
                                           other stakeholders to ensure that safer pest management
                                           practices  are used in agriculture, homes, and public
                                           buildings (including schools). For example EPA
                                           continued to partner with farmers, researchers, and
                                           agribusiness to encourage the use  of innovative and
                                           economical methods for reducing pesticide risks.
5?
9
                                                                              FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                  11-37

-------
•a
o
          EXAMPLES OF INNOVATION IN REDUCING
                     PESTICIDE RISK
                (These projects are described at
          http://www.epa.gov/oppbppdl/PESP/.)
       The Pineapple Growers Association of Hawaii is using a
       new  innovative  injection sprayer that releases
       herbicides only where they are needed.  The
       Association is also testing a 'living mulch" grass cover
       crop that is stunted in height and out-competes other
       weeds.
       The Glades Crop Care, Inc. in Florida has found that
       their pepper growers can spend 63 percent less money
       on pest management by making fewer applications
       of pesticides, applying chemicals that are much less
       environmentally  disruptive and by using a more
       biointensive pest management program. In addition,
       these  same   growers   ended  up   using
       43 percent less pesticides on their pepper crop.
       The New York City Board of Education reduced
       pesticides in their schools by 33 percent in the 2000
       school year. This school year (September 2000), they
       are only using boric  acid and baits. The Department
       avoids any and all  use of pesticide  products in
       classrooms and other areas  where students might be
       exposed to potentially harmful levels of pesticides.
       The Mint Industry  Research Council promotes the use
       of predatory mites  to control  spider mites and the
       use of clean  rootstock  that will prevent  the
       introduction of diseased material into new fields at
       the time they are being established.
    In addition, EPA collaborated with Canada's Pest
Management Regulatory Agency to develop an exam
of core principles  for pesticide applicators to be
incorporated into existing pesticide  applicator
certification and training programs in both countries.
EPA  is also  working with the states and  tribes  to
establish a framework for better managing pesticides
that are likely to leach into groundwater.
Lead
    By the end of FY 2000 EPA had authorized a total
of 38 programs  (34 states, two  tribes, the District of
Columbia, and Puerto Rico) to train and certify lead-
based paint abatement professionals to help ensure that
those engaged in abatement projects work to  minimize
lead exposure. EPA began operating such programs in
the remaining states and  three  territories. EPA
implemented the Pre-renovation Notification Rule,
which  requires people who  perform renovation for
compensation to distribute a lead hazard information
pamphlet before starting the work. The Agency also
promulgated the Lead Hazard Rule, which establishes
uniform, national standards for lead in paint, dust, and
soil in pre-1978 housing and  child-care facilities.
The High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge Program

    High production volume chemicals are those that
are manufactured or imported into the U. S. in amounts
of one million pounds or more. The HPV Challenge
Program is addressing deficiencies  in the public
availability of basic health and environmental hazard
data for 2,800 HPV chemicals so that scientists, policy
makers,  industry, and the public  can make sound
judgments about the potential risks from these
chemicals to people and the environment. The program
made progress in FY 2000 by significantly increasing
the number of companies and sponsored chemicals in
the program from last year's  level. Four hundred and
sixty-nine companies  have  committed publicly  to
making screening-level hazard data on 2,155 chemicals
available by 2005. EPA has already received some data,
which are provided on the Chemical Right to Know
web site  (www.epa.gov/chemrtk).
Green Chemistry

    In  FY 2000 EPA  advanced pollution prevention
and industrial  ecology through the Green Chemistry
Challenge Awards Program, which recognizes and
supports innovative chemical processes that accomplish
pollution prevention  through source reduction.  In
FY 2000 EPA received 50 percent more nominations
for the awards than its target of 50  applications/
nominations. Six awards were made in five categories,
including those for designing  safer chemicals, academic
contributions, and small businesses. As an example, one
award  was made to Dow  AgroSciences for the
development  of the  Sentricon™ Termite Colony
Elimination System. Each year as many as 1.5 million
homeowners in the United States experience a termite
problem and seek  a control option. Sentricon™
represents a novel technology enabling an Integrated
Pest Management approach by using monitoring and
targeted  delivery of a highly specific bait.  It delivers
high   technical  performance,   environmental
compatibility, and reduced human risk through the use
of  very  small quantities of the control agent. For
11-38
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
specific information on other awards made in FY 2000,
see the Green Chemistry Home Page (www.epa.gov/
greenchemistry).
Asbestos

   A 1999 consumer scare over asbestos-contaminated
vermiculite prompted EPA to undertake an analysis of
the level of  asbestos in vermiculite. Vermiculite is a
product whose absorbent properties make it useful in
lawn  and garden, agricultural,  and horticultural
products. EPAs analysis found that consumers face only
a minimal health risk from using vermiculite products
at home or  in their  gardens.  However, because the
analysis showed that occupational vermiculite exposure
might be  higher, EPA provided the analysis to the
Occupational Safety and Health  Administration
(OSHA) for further study. In FY 2000 EPA also
proposed  extending the Asbestos  Worker Protection
Rule issued under the authority of the Toxic Substances
Control Act. The  extension  is intended to extend
protection from the risks  associated with asbestos
exposure to  state and local government workers in 27
states not otherwise covered by OSHA asbestos
standards,  or by  OSHA-approved state Worker
Protection plans, as well as employees in the automotive
brake and clutch repair industry.
Endocrine Disrupters

   EPA did not begin testing chemicals in commerce
for endocrine disruption in FY 2000, as was projected
in 1999. The  Agency found that assay systems and high-
throughput pre-screening (HTPS) technology, which
is an automated test system capable of detecting
estrogen  and androgen receptor  interactions on
thousands of chemicals, were not yet sufficiently
developed for routine regulatory application for existing
and new chemicals. EPA is now focusing on developing
quantitative  structure-activity  relationship models to
serve the purpose HTPS  would have served and
continues  to monitor the progress of HTPS efforts
for endocrine disruption elsewhere in the world. EPA
was successful in  initiating work on four screens,
exceeding its goal of two, while continuing work on
two screens it had initiated the  previous year. The
Agency anticipates completing work on all eight Tier 1
screens (Tier 1 screens detect chemical substances
capable of interacting with the  estrogen, androgen, and
thyroid hormonal systems) by the end of 2003 and the
additional five Tier 2 tests  (Tier 2 tests confirm and
characterize  the interaction) by the end of 2005.
Achieving Healthier Indoor Environments

    In FY 2000 EPA took action to raise  public
awareness  about the  role of triggers of asthma in
increasing the severity  and frequency of asthma
episodes in indoor settings. The action was part of the
Childhood Asthma Initiative and focused particularly
on  low-income children. The Ad Council, which
provides advertising campaigns for the public good,
selected EPA for a multi-year partnership through which
the Council is providing pro bono creative services to
help the Agency develop  a series of public messages
about the relationship between indoor pollutants and
asthma. EPA organized three Regional Asthma Summits
for Managed Care to engage the managed care industry
in efforts to include information about indoor  asthma
trigger control  in  their conventional  medical
management plans for asthma patients.  The  first
National Asthma In-Home Education and Management
grants competition produced two winning pilot projects,
which received roughly $100,000 each, to demonstrate
the results of educating families with asthma sufferers
about indoor asthma triggers in their homes.

    A new public service  announcement encouraging
parents who normally smoke inside their homes to "go
outside for your kids" won the prestigious Silver Screen
Award for television advertising and leveraged more
than $14 million worth  of donated air time.  The
announcement was co-sponsored by EPA with the


            PILOT FOR "BUY CLEAN"
  EPA and the Western Massachusetts Coalition for
  Occupational Safety  and Health are testing a pilot
  program called "Buy Clean" with the Chicopee School
  District. "Buy Clean" schools will evaluate products
  as varied as  art, auto shop, and drafting classroom
  supplies, landscaping and renovation products,
  cleaners, chemicals used in chemistry laboratories, and
  other custodial and maintenance supplies, and
  purchase environmentally preferable products and
  services (where appropriate) to promote healthier
  indoor air in schools. Schools will consider health,
  environmental,   and  product  effectiveness
  characteristics in making decisions on which products
  to purchase. The project is  part of a pilot grant
  program to test "Buy Clean" in schools around the
  country. In addition,  EPA is investigating incentives
  to encourage vendors to  sell products that are  more
  environmentally preferable at competitive prices.
                                                                                  FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                      11-39

-------
o
    Consumer Federation of America Foundation and the
    American Medical Association. The radio version played
    on 625 radio stations, and the print campaign ran in
    281 newspapers across the nation. Environmental
    tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure increases the  risk of
    lower respiratory tract infections such as bronchitis and
    pneumonia. EPA estimates that between 150,000 and
    300,000 of these cases annually in infants and children
    up to 18 months of age are attributable to exposure to
    ETS (EPA 1992). ETS exposure is causally associated
    with increased risk of acute and chronic middle ear
    disease (World Health Organization 1999). The Agency
    estimates that 395,000 more children aged six and under
    are now living in homes where smoking is not permitted
    than in FY 1999 as  a result of such education and
    outreach  efforts.

        EPA  met its goal in FY 2000 to  educate the public
    about the health risks of indoor radon exposure  by
    collaborating with states through the federal radon
    grants program and working in partnership  with
    nongovernmental organizations such as  the National
    Environmental Health Association and the Consumer
    Federation of America Foundation.  Indoor radon
    exposure causes an estimated  15,000 to 22,000  lung
    cancer deaths each  year. Based on sales of radon
    mitigation fans, EPA estimates that as a result of various
    outreach activities some 52,000 residential radon
    mitigations  took place in FY 2000,  meaning that
    approximately 138,800 more  people lived in  homes
    where radon exposure has been reduced than last year.
    Moreover, based on information collected by the
    National  Association of Home Builders, some 200,000
    new homes were built in FY 2000 using radon-resistant
    construction techniques, preventing residential exposure
    to radon  for 534,000 more people.
        Contributing to  EPA's effort to create healthier
    indoor environments for  children in schools,  an
    additional 5,000 schools in FY 2000 (representing about
    2,600,000 students and  staff)  adopted  the  problem-
    solving and pollution prevention approaches to school
    indoor environments in the Agency's Indoor Air Quality
    Tools for Schools kit.

    Preventing Pollution, Reducing Waste,
     and Recycling

    Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)

        One  important measure of the nation's progress
    in fostering pollution prevention is the trend in the
                                                         generation of non-recycled wastes covered by TRI.
                                                         Waste generation measures are best suited for assessing
                                                         source reduction efforts, as they are unaffected by the
                                                         application of pollution control systems (e.g., waste
                                                         treatment systems, incinerators,  etc.) which reduce
                                                         environmental releases but do not reduce or prevent
                                                         generation of pollutants at their source. The generation
                                                         of non-recycled  wastes by those manufacturing
                                                         industries that have been monitored over the last 8 years
                                                         under TRI declined by 15.1 million pounds from 1997
                                                         to 1998, a 0.2 percent decline. When the change between
                                                         1997 and 1998 is normalized for increases in production
                                                         by these  industrial categories, the decrease represents a
                                                         4.1 percent reduction, which  is more than double the
                                                         FY 2000 performance target  of a two percent annual
                                                         production-normalized decline in the generation of
                                                         non-recycled TRI wastes.
                                                              Releases and Transfers of TRI Chemicals
                                                             (1995-1998) and Associated Hazard  Indices
                                                            6000
                                                           5800
                                                           5600
                                                         o
                                                         in
                                                         o 5400
                                                           5200
                                                            5000
                                                                    - Hazard Index (1995 = 100) |
                                                                    100                  99.7
                    103.96
                                                                    5868
                                                                               91.1
5631
5764
                                                                    1995
                                                                               1996
                                                                                         1997
                                                                                                   1998
                                                              Enhanced Chemical List Included; New 1998 Reporting
                                                              Sectors Excluded
                                                             Other important measures of pollution prevention
                                                          are the trends for the volume and toxicity of direct
                                                          environmental  releases  and off-site transfers of
                                                          chemicals covered by TRI. Release/transfer measures,
                                                          unlike waste generation measures, are considered "end-
                                                          of-pipe" measures that capture pollution levels after
                                                          on-site pollution  control or recycling/recovery
                                                          technologies have been applied to generated wastes. The
                                                          releases and off-site transfers from those manufacturing
                                                          industries and chemicals that have been monitored since
                                                          the TRI chemical reporting list was expanded in 1995
                                                          declined by 187.3 million pounds (3.2%) from 1997 to
                                                          1998. However, the toxicity of  these  wastes has
                                                          increased from  1995  to 1998. [The hazard index is
11-40
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
determined by multiplying the release/transfer pounds
for a chemical by the higher of the two toxicity weights
(ingestion or inhalation)  assigned to the chemical in
EPA's Risk Screening Environmental Indicators model,
and then indexing the resulting values; the index for
the value from the year 1995 is 100.] Further discussion
of the TRI Program is presented under Goal 7.
    EPA's New Chemicals  screening system  (Pre-
Manufacture Notice  (PMN) requirements) and the
Chemical Right to Know (CRtK) initiative may help to
reverse the trend of increasing waste toxicity. The PMN
process prevents manufacture  of new chemicals
determined to pose unreasonable  human health or
environmental risks. The Agency expects the CRtK
Initiative, begun in FY 2000, to encourage industry to
replace dangerous  chemicals already in use by making
hazard information publicly available by 2005 for nearly
2,155 HPV chemicals.
Design for the Environment Program (DfE)

    DfE continues to work with private sector partners
to advance cleaner technologies. In  2000 EPA's effort
helped achieve a cumulative 36 percent increase in the
use of alternative cleaning technologies by the garment
care industry over  1998 levels. Under the program, 14
safer cleaning products have been developed and
marketed, including redesigned products that do not
contain alkyl phenol ethoxylates (suspected endocrine
disrupters). The foam furniture industry is investigating
alternatives to the use of  methylene chloride, a
hazardous air pollutant for which OSFIA has restricted
use in foam adhesive applications.  The dry cleaning
industry  has  significantly reduced  its  use  of
perchloroethylene, which EPA has characterized as a
probable human carcinogen.
Persistent Bioaccumuktive and Toxic (PBT) Initiative

   The PBT Initiative  seeks to reduce  the use of
priority PBT pollutants and their presence in the
environment. In FY 2000 EPA released four National
Action Plans for public comment. These plans address
ongoing  and planned reduction  activities  for
Hexachlorobenzene; alkyl-lead; Octachlorostyrene; and
a group of  five canceled pesticides (Aldrin/Dieldrin,
Chlordane,  dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane  (DDT),
Mirex, and  Toxaphene).  Additional efforts included
finalizing the Mercury Action Plan, expanding the
collection of monitoring data on PBTs in fish and in
humans, funding 12 new state and regional reduction
projects, evaluating more than 200 additional substances
          Fish and Wildlife Advisories by Type,
                      1993 -1999
     3000
     2500
  Ł  2000
  o
  
-------
•a
o
Plan; however, the advisory data indicate that much
work needs to be done to ensure that those individuals
who consume fish and wildlife in large quantities are
protected  from toxics in their food. Additional
information pertaining  to the advisories is found in
Goal 2.
Recycling of Municipal Solid Waste

    Recycling of municipal solid waste (MSW) has
continued to increase, and the diversion of more MSW
from landfilling and combustion to recycling is higher
than ever before. In 1998, the most recent year for which
data are available, 28.2 percent of MSW was recycled,
an increase of 0.8 percent from 1997. This figure means
that more than 62 million tons of recyclables  were
diverted from disposal in  1998 alone. The increase
bodes well for  attainment of EPA's FY 2000  target
(reflecting 1999 recycling) of 29  percent (64 million
tons). Compared to the previous year, MSW generation
increased in 1998 by 4 million tons, reaching a level of
220 million tons. Per capita generation remained stable
at 4.4 pounds per day, slightly higher than the Agency's
goal of 4.3 pounds per day.

Preventing Pollution on Tribal Lands

    An accurate assessment of current environmental
conditions is critical to addressing environmental issues
in Indian Country. In FY 2000 EPA  collected  basic
environmental data for six percent of Indian Country,
for a cumulative total of 16 percent. In a complementary
effort, EPA regional offices are working with tribes to
help implement environmental programs in Indian
Country. In FY 2000,16 tribes assumed EPA program
responsibilities, exceeding the Agency's goal of 12 tribes.
The total number of EPA programs operated by tribes
is now 270. Also, by the end of FY 2000, 49 tribes had
signed Tribal  Environmental Agreements, which
identify tribe-specific  environmental priorities to
address multimedia environmental concerns in Indian
Country.

SUMMARY OF FY 2000 PERFORMANCE

    EPA and its partners made  substantial progress
toward achieving Goal 4 and its objectives. By the end
of FY 2000 EPA had authorized 38  states, tribes, or
territories to train  and certify lead-based  paint
abatement professionals to help ensure that those
engaged in abatement projects work to minimize lead
exposure. Of particular importance were  the 469
companies that have committed to make screening-level
hazard data available publicly on 2,155 HPV chemicals
by 2005. Also in FY 2000, EPA's efforts helped to
achieve a cumulative 36 percent increase in the use of
alternative cleaning technologies by the garment care
industry over 1998 levels. Finally EPA released four
National Action Plans that address ongoing and planned
reduction activities for five canceled pesticides as part
of the initiative  to  reduce  the use and presence of
priority PBT pollutants in the environment.

STRENGTHENING PROGRAM INTEGRITY
THROUGH IMPROVED MANAGEMENT

    In response to a continuing concern that the Agency
needs to strengthen oversight provided for tribal grants
(in particular, grants made  with General Assistance
Program  funds), EPA assigned additional staff,
developed improved guidance, and provided additional
training to its grants management staff in FY 2000.
Limitations that prevent the use of General Assistance
funds for implementing environmental programs have
been a barrier to tribes' assumption of programs and
willingness to enter into substantive agreements.

RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS

    Research supports Goal 4 in the development or
improvement of  test guidelines for human health and
ecological endpoints of regulatory concern under the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act and
the  Toxic  Substances Control Act. In FY 2000 EPA
developed a model to assess the susceptibility of infants'
and children's  developing immune  systems  to
environmental contaminants. It will be an important
tool for evaluating the impact  of environmental
stressors  on human health and ecological endpoints.
Understanding how environmental contaminants affect
developing immune  systems is particularly important
because infants and children appear to be at greater
risk than adults of experiencing adverse reactions when
exposed to toxic  substances.

PROGRAM EVALUATION

    The General Accounting Office (GAO)  recently
assessed the impact  and effectiveness of several EPA
activities dealingwith children's health. In its November
11-42
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
1999 report, Pesticides:  Use, Effects and Alternatives to
Pesticides in Schools (RCED-00-17, http://www.gao.gov),
GAO noted that although there is no comprehensive,
nationwide  information on the amount of pesticides
used in schools, the Agency is considering conducting
a survey on the use of pesticides in schools. GAO also
determined that information is limited regarding short-
and long-term illnesses related to pesticide exposure in
all settings;  however, EPA and the National Institutes
of Health have initiated several studies to identify
illnesses  linked to pesticide exposure. To address
potential exposure of children to pesticides, the Agency
and the states have initiatives to encourage reduced use
of pesticides in schools  through Integrated Pest
Management and the Pesticide  Environmental
Stewardship Program, as well as the use of reduced-
risk pesticides.
    GAO also  assessed the implementation of the
Worker Protection Standards and how well the Worker
Protection Program protects children who might be
exposed to pesticides in agricultural settings. GAO made
several recommendations regarding worker protection
in its report Pesticides: Improvements Needed to Ensure the
Safety of 'Farmworkers and Their Children (RCED-00-40).
EPA generally agrees that the recommendations are
sound and  intends  to consider  them during the
assessment  of  the Worker  Protection Program  in
FY2001.

    In FY 2000 EPA began the National Assessment
of the Worker Protection Standard for pesticides. The
assessment,  a multi-phase process that will take place
over the next 18 to 24  months, will help the Agency
determine whether the Worker Protection Standard
program  is  adequately meeting its intended goals  of
addressing the risks to agricultural workers. The initial
public participation meeting was held in June 2000  in
Austin, Texas. As a result of that meeting, a number  of
assessment  themes or topic areas were identified for
further consideration, including training, enforcement,
complaint  and  retaliation, children's health,  and
communication.
    EPA  continued its evaluation of the certification
and training program for pesticide applicators, which
started in 1997 with the formation of the joint EPA-
U.S.  Department of Agriculture  Certification and
Training Assessment Group (CTAG). In FY 2000 states
indicated the need for using a professional exam
development process  to improve their  ability  to
determine the competency of pesticide applicators.
CTAG's work is leading to improvement in pesticide
applicator exams, establishment of a pesticide safety
education center for training educators and regulators,
and development of a national core pesticide applicator
certification exam for use by state regulators. Improving
the certification and training program addresses risk at
the source (pesticide applications).

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS  OF FY 2000
PERFORMANCE ON FY 2001 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE PLAN

   EPA has reflected FY 2000 performance and
advances in program measurement in its FY 2001
annual performance goals (APGs) and targets.  The
performance  measure for environmental stewardship
strategies (ESP) in the prevention of harmful pesticide
exposure has been significantly increased for FY 2001,
based  on greater than expected performance  in
FY 2000. The program had  revised the format and
requirements for completing ESP strategies, which
streamlined and accelerated the submissions and review
processes. The FY 2001 APG  for safer alternative
cleaning technologies has been reworded to include a
new measure, perchloroethylene reduction, which is a
more reliable indicator of progress toward the APG
than the percentage increase  in the use of alternative
cleaning technologies, the FY 2000 measure. In addition
EPA is discontinuing its performance measure for tribal
environmental agreements (TEAs) while it redefines
the TEA process.

TABLE OF RESULTS
   The following table of results includes performance
results  for the nine FY 2000 APGs that appear in Goal
4. In cases where the FY 2000 APG is associated with
an FY 1999 APG, the table includes the FY 1999 APG
below the FY 2000  APG for ease in comparing
performance.
                                                                                  FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                      11-43

-------
                                                FY 2000 Annual Report
                           Annual Performance Goals and Measures - Table of Results
I Summary FY 2000 Performance |
 4'   I Goals Pol Goals    Pol
     IMI»>    Ł- M«t ««„•   V
                                       GOAL 4 - PREVENTING POLLUTION AND REDUCING
                                          RISK IN COMMUNITIES, HOMES, WORKPLACES,
                                                            AND ECOSYSTEMS
               FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                             FY 2000
                                                                                        Planned    Actual
                                                                                                      FY 1999
                                                                                                      Actual
         BY 2005, PUBLIC AND ECOSYSTEM RISK FROM PESTICIDES WILL BE REDUCED THROUGH MIGRATION TO
         LOWER RISK PESTICIDES AND PEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, IMPROVING EDUCATION OF THE PUBLIC
          AND AT-RISK WORKERS, AND FORMING 'PESTICIDE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP"PARTNERSHIPS
                                             WITH PESTICIDE USER GROUPS.
1
       FY 2000 APG 21:  Protect homes, communities, and workplaces from harmful exposure to
                       pesticides and related pollutants through improved cultural practices
                       and enhanced public education, resulting in a reduction (to be
                       determined) in the incidence of pesticide poisonings reported
                       nationwide.

       (FY 1999)        Protect homes, communities, and workplaces from harmful exposure to
                       pesticides and related pollutants through improved cultural practices and
                       enhanced public education, resulting in a reduction of 15% cumulative (1994
                       reporting base) in the incidence of pesticide poisonings reported nationwide.

       Performance Measures
        -  Environmental Stewardship Strategies.
        -  Manage pesticides with high probability to leach/persist in groundwater.
        -  Labor population will be adequately trained (cumulative)*.

       Explanation:     Goal not met. Data now available do not allow a reliable estimate of the
                       magnitude or trend in the national incidence of pesticide poisonings. Through
                       the Chemical and Pesticide Results Measures project, which involves EPA,
                       state, and industry stakeholders, EPA is developing an accurate reporting
                       measure for pesticide poisonings, among other environmental indicators. EPA
                       expects to develop this measure in FY 2002. The Pesticide and Groundwater
                       State Management Plan Rule was delayed in regulatory review, which
                       prevented the Agency from meeting its goal. It is unclear at this time when
                       the rule will move forward, if at all. In spite of the delay in finalizing the rule,
                       the Agency is on track to  meet its long-term goal, which is to manage the risk
                       of pesticides in groundwater. The Agency has refocused this performance
                       measure in FY 2001 on significant pesticide management actions taken by
                       EPA on the specific pesticides that are likely to leach and persist in
                       groundwater. '[Note: The  FY 2001 President's Budget incorrectly
                       characterized the target for the performance measure "labor population will
                       be adequately trained" as a cumulative percentage instead of an annual
                       percentage. Therefore the FY 2000 achievement is 50% of the labor
                       population trained.]

       Data Source:     Aggregation of training statistics from state cooperative extension services
                       and Worker Protection Program. State Cooperative Extension Services
                       represent the education and training arm of State Agriculture Departments
                       that extend training programs to counties.

       Data Quality:     Training statistics are dependent on accurate record keeping at state or
                       county level.
•a
o
                                                                                    71
                                                                                    10%
                                                                                    50%
109
0%
50%
 69
 0%
48%
11-44
          EPA's FY2000 Annual Report

-------
     FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                        FY 2000
                                                                                   Planned    Actual
                    FY 1999
                     Actual
     BY 2005, THE NUMBER OF YOUNG CHILDREN WITH HIGH LEVELS OF LEAD IN THEIR BLOOD WILL BE
                            SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED FROMTHE EARLY 1990'S.
FY 2000 APG 22:  Administer federal programs and oversee state implementation of
                programs for lead-based paint abatement certification and training in
                50 states, to reduce exposure to lead-based paint and ensure
                significant decreases in children's blood levels by 2005.

(FY 1999)        Complete the building of a lead-based paint abatement certification and
                training in 50 states, to ensure significant decreases in children's blood lead
                levels by 2005 through reduced exposure to lead-based paint.

Explanation:     Through FY 2000 EPA continued building the lead-based abatement training
                and certification program. Programs for the training, accreditation and
                certification of lead-based paint abatement professionals were established in
                38 programs (34 states, two tribes, the  District of Columbia, and Puerto
                Rico). For 19 states that have chosen not to seek approval of a state
                program, a federal training, accreditation and certification program  was
                established. Additional legal requirements for the tribes  have delayed
                development of two of the four programs planned for FY 2000. EPA activities
                to reduce exposure to lead-based paint are on track to ensure significant
                decreases in children's blood levels by 2005.

Data Source:     Data on blood lead levels in children are from the National Health and
                Nutrition Examination Surveys conducted by the Centers for Disease Control
                and Prevention. Annual surveys started in 1999.

Data Quality:     Data quality issues are related to survey sampling bias and changes in
                survey questions from survey to survey.
 Target
 year is
FY 2005
                     Target
                     year is
                    FY 2005
          BY 2005, OF THE APPROXIMATELY 2,000 CHEMICALS AND 40 GENETICALLY ENGINEERED
 MICROORGANISMS EXPECTEDTO ENTER COMMERCE EACH YEAR, WE WILL SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE THE
  INTRODUCTION BY INDUSTRY OF SAFER OR 'GREENER"CHEMICALS WHICH WILL DECREASE THE NEED
                                 FOR REGULATORY MANAGEMENT BY EPA.
FY 2000 APG 23:  Ensure that of the up to 1,800 new chemicals and microorganisms
                submitted by industry each year, those that are introduced in commerce
                are safe to humans and the environment for their intended uses.

(FY 1999)        Ensure that of the approximately 1,800 new chemicals and micro-organisms
                submitted by industry each year,  those that are introduced in commerce are
                safe to humans and the environment for their intended uses.

Explanation:     Goal met.

Data Source:     The New Chemicals Management Information Tracking System tracks
                requests submitted by industries  for review of new chemicals. The requests
                include information on chemicals to be manufactured and imported,
                chemical identity, manufacturing process,  use, worker exposure,
                environmental releases, and disposal.

Data Quality:     EPA reviews industry data and performs risk screening and assessments.
1,800
1,838
                     1,717
FY 2000 APG 24:  Provide methods and models to evaluate the impact of environmental
                stressors on human health and ecological endpoints for use in
                guidelines, assessments, and strategies.

Performance Measure
 -  Develop an animal model to assess susceptibility of the developing immune system to
   environmental contaminants.

Explanation:     Goal met. A model to assess the susceptibility of the developing immune
                system to environmental contaminants was produced. The model is an
                important tool for evaluating the impact of environmental stressors on human
                health and ecological endpoints.
                      No
                    FY 1999
                      APG
                                a
                                d§
                                &
                                                                                                GPRA Performance
                                                                                                                 11-45

-------
FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Data Source: Agency generated material.
Data Quality: As required by the Agency-wide formal peer review policy issued in 1993,
and reaffirmed in 1994 and 1998, all major scientific and technical work
products used in Agency decision making are independently peer reviewed
before their use. EPA has implemented a rigorous process of peer review for
both its in-house and extramural research programs. Peer review panels
include scientists and engineers from academia, industry, and other federal
agencies.
FY 2000
Planned

Actual

FY 1999
Actual

BY 2005, 15 MILLION MORE AMERICANS WILL LIVE OR WORK IN HOMES, SCHOOLS, OR OFFICE BUILDINGS
WITH HEALTHIER INDOOR AIR THAN IN 1994.
FY 2000 APG 25: 890,000 additional people will be living in healthier residential indoor
environments.
(FY 1999) 700,000 additional people will live in healthier residential indoor
environments.
Explanation: FY 2000: Goal met. In FY 2000 there were 1,032,000 additional people living
in healthier residential indoor environments. The target was exceeded
because EPA's outreach efforts with builders to construct radon-resistant
homes and outreach to the general public to mitigate radon were more
effective than originally anticipated.
FY 1999: Goal met. Based on information received in FY 2000, EPA
exceeded its FY 1999 targets. In FY 1999 the results were higher (than the
planned target of 700,000) because outreach efforts were also more effective
than anticipated.
Data Source: The National Association of Home Builders and the radon industry provide
data on number of radon resistant homes built. The number of homes
mitigated for high radon levels is obtained through voluntary industry
reporting. The Centers for Disease Control provide data on the number of
children under 6 years old not exposed to environmental tobacco smoke in
the home.
Data Quality: Each of the data sources described above provides a reasonable estimate of
public action on EPA activities.
FY 2000 APG 26: 2,580,000 students, faculty and staff will experience improved indoor air
quality in their schools.
Explanation: Goal met. An additional 5,000 schools (representing about 2.6 million
students, faculty and staff) adopted the Agency's Air Quality Tools for
Schools kit.
Data Source: EPA's Indoor Air Quality Tools for Schools Program is using a database to
track the number of schools that receive the Tools for Schools kit and the
number of schools implementing good indoor air quality practices consistent
with EPA guidance.
Data Quality: Data on actions taken are voluntarily self-reported by school personnel which
may limit accuracy. Interpretation of EPA's guidance may also vary among
schools, which affects what the schools report.
890,000
2,580,000
1,032,000
2,600,000
1,322,000
No
FY 1999
APG
BY 2005, REDUCE BY 25% (FROM 1992 LEVEL) THE QUANTITY OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS RELEASED, DISPOSED
OFJREATED, OR COMBUSTED FOR ENERGY RECOVERY. HALF OFTHIS REDUCTION WILL BE ACHIEVED
THROUGH POLLUTION PREVENTION PRACTICES.
FY 2000 APG 27: The quantity of Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) pollutants released,
disposed of, treated or combusted for energy recovery, (normalized for
changes in industrial production) will be reduced by 200 millions
pounds, or 2%, from 1999 reporting levels.
200 M Ibs
Data
available
in
FY 2002

1
•a
o
11-46
             EPA's FY2000 Annual Report

-------
FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
(FY 1999) The quantity of Toxic Release Inventory pollutants released, treated, or
combusted for energy recovery will be reduced by 200 million pounds, or 2%
from 1998 reporting levels.
Explanation: FY 2000 data will not be available until 2002 due to time lags associated with
reporting and analysis. The most recent data available show the generation of
non-recycled wastes by those manufacturing industries that have been
monitored over the lasts years under TRI declined by 15.1 million pounds
from 1997 to 1998, a 0.2% decline. When the change between 1997 and
1998 is normalized for increases in production by these industrial categories,
the decrease represents a 4.1% reduction. Greater use of pollution
prevention tools and techniques have lead to the continued trend of reduction
in waste generation.
Data Source: Facilities reporting under TRI. For example, in FY 1997, 21,490 facilities filed
71,670 TRI reports. EPA is developing regulations for improving reporting of
source reduction activities by TRI reporting facilities.
Data Quality: A recent General Accounting Office (GAO) report reviewed EPA's progress to
implement source reduction reporting requirements, results of voluntary
program to reduce emissions of 17 highly toxic chemicals, and activities to
disseminate source reduction information to meet state and industry needs.
Facilities reporting under TRI are identified by regulation and are a narrower
category of facilities. TRI release data covers only a fraction of the total
release. [Toxic Substances: EPA Needs More Reliable Source Reduction
Data and Progress Measures (09/23/94, GAO/RCED-94-93)].
FY 2000
Planned

Actual

FY 1999
Actual
Data
available
in
FY 2001
BY 2005, EPA AND ITS PARTNERS WILL INCREASE RECYCLING AND DECREASE THE QUANTITY AND
TOXICITY OF WASTE GENERATED.
FY 2000 APG 28: Divert an additional 1% (for a cumulative total of 29% or 64 million tons)
of municipal solid waste from land filling and combustion, and maintain
per capita generation of RCRA municipal solid waste at 4.3 pounds per
day.
(FY 1999) Maintain levels (for a cumulative total of 28% or 62 million tons) of municipal
solid waste diverted from land filing and combustion, and maintain per capita
generation of RCRA municipal solid waste at 4.3 pounds per day.
Explanation: Analysis of FY 1999 data is anticipated by September 2001 .
Data Source: The baseline numbers for municipal solid waste (MSW) source reduction and
recycling found in an EPA report titled "Characterization of Municipal Solid
Waste in the United States" are developed using a materials flow
methodology employing data largely from the Department of Commerce.
Data Quality: The report, including the baseline numbers and current progress, is widely
accepted among experts. Data limitations stem from the fact that the baseline
and annual progress numbers are based on a series of models, assumptions,
and extrapolations, and as such, are not an empirical accounting of MSW
generated or recycled.
64 (29%)
4.3 Ib
Data
available
in
FY 2002
Data
available
in
FY 2001
BY 2003, 60% OF INDIAN COUNTRY WILL BE ASSESSED FOR ITS ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION, AND TRIBES
AND EPA WILL BE IMPLEMENTING PLANS TO ADDRESS PRIORITY ISSUES.
FY 2000 APG 29: 16% of tribal environmental baseline information will be collected and
12 additional tribes (cumulative total of 57) will have tribal/EPA
environmental agreements or identified environmental priorities.
(FY 1999) 10% of tribal environmental baseline information will be collected and ten
additional tribes (cumulative total of 45) will have tribal/EPA environmental
agreements or identified environmental priorities.
16%
12
16%
4
10%
11
                         a
                         d§
                         &
GPRA Performance
                      11-47

-------
FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Explanation: Goal not met. The Agency met its goal of collecting a 6% of tribal baseline
information by enabling a pilot demonstration model to access and display
tribal information from 1 1 EPA databases and seven internal data collection
surveys containing environmental information. However, only four of the
projected 12 EPA/Tibal Environmental Agreements (TEAs) were signed.
During FY 2000 the Agency clarified its definition of TEAs to provide
consistency across the program. Only four TEAs met the clarified definition to
count as FY 2000 achievements. While the target for TEAs was not met in
FY 2000, the work done to clarify the elements of a TEA and to assure
consistency across the nation will lead to more accurate and consistent
reporting in 2001 and beyond.
Data Source: Data are collected from EPA National Data bases in Envirofacts and regional
records on grant programs. Tribal office records on tribal and federally funded
data collection and other assessment activities are also important sources.
As needed, data are also sought from state records.
Data Quality: EPA reviews and analyzes the data limitations and gaps. For example it is
expected that some parts of the environment are more thoroughly studied
than others and some areas have more complete data than others. EPA in
cooperation with the tribes determines the appropriate follow-up activities to
address data inadequacies and gaps through contracting resources, grant
work plans, and environmental program negotiations.
FY 2000
Planned

Actual

FY 1999
Actual

1
•a
o
11-48
             EPA's FY2000 Annual Report

-------
   Goal 5 FY 2000 obligations        GOAL 5: BETTER WASTE MANAGEMENT,
                            RESTORATION OF CONTAMINATED WASTE SITES,
                                          AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
                           America's wastes will be stored, treated, and disposed of in ways that
                           prevent harm to people and the natural environment. EPA will work to
                             clean up previously polluted sites, restore them to uses appropriate
   Note: EPA FY 2000 Obligations       f°r surrounding communities, and respond to and prevent
                                           waste-related or industrial accidents.
were $8,974 million
OVERVIEW
    Improper waste management and disposal threatens
human health and  the environment. Uncontrolled
hazardous and toxic substances, including radioactive
waste, migrate to the  air, groundwater, and surface water,
contaminating drinking water supplies for communities
located miles from a waste site and potentially causing
acute illnesses or chronic diseases. Hazardous and toxic
substances present unique health threats to sensitive
populations, such as  children, senior citizens, and tribal
communities that follow subsistence lifestyles. They can
also significantly damage sensitive ecosystems. To protect
against these risks, EPA has developed and implemented
policies to clean up contamination at active and inactive
waste disposal and management sites; promote safe waste
storage, treatment, and disposal; and prevent spills and
releases of hazardous and toxic materials. These policies
are implemented through a number of EPA programs,
usually   conducted  under  the provisions  of
the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or
Superfund) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA).  Goal  5  is on track to meet  or exceed
objectives outlined in the strategic plan.

FY 2000 PERFORMANCE

Ensuring Progress Through Effective and
Efficient Cleanups
Superfund
    EPA and its state and tribal partners use Superfund
resources to provide emergency response to hazardous
substance releases and to clean up inactive  hazardous
waste disposal sites.  The Superfund process is often a
multistage and multiyear effort  that begins with a
                                           preliminary assessment or site inspection to determine
                                           the actions needed to address threats at a site (including
                                           emergency removal  actions)  and moves through
                                           postconstruction activities, such as 5-year reviews, to
                                           ensure that remedies  remain protective as site
                                           conditions, risk science, or cleanup technologies evolve.
                                           Considerable progress has been made in the program
                                           since EPA announced a third round of  administrative
                                           reforms in 1995.
                                              As a measure of achieving progress in hazardous
                                           waste cleanups, EPA has selected construction
                                           completion, the point at which a cleanup remedy is in
                                           place. During FY 2000, 87 Superfund sites  reached
                                           construction completion, exceeding the Agency's goal
                                           of 85 sites, for a total of 757 sites over  the life of the
                                           program on track with the long-term goal of achieving
                                           900 construction completions by the end of FY 2002.
                                           The location and other information about these sites
                                           can be found at http://www.epa.gov/superfund/
                                           sites/query. More than 92 percent of the sites on the
                                           National Priorities List (NPL) are either undergoing
                                           cleanup construction or cleanup has been completed.

                                              Other Superfund Program  accomplishments in
                                           FY 2000 included 468 final site assessment decisions
                                           to determine the level of threat at waste sites, for  a
                                           total of 36,152 over the life of the program. The
                                           program also conducted 357 removal response actions,
                                           including 208 time-critical responses to emergencies
                                           such as chemical fires and train derailments  that are
                                           imminent and substantial threats to human health and
                                           the environment, for a total of 6,286 removal response
                                           actions over the life of the program. More than 1,200
                                           NPL sites now have all final cleanup plans approved.
                                           Since 1982 the program has cleaned up more than
                                           467 million cubic yards of contaminated solids and
                                           sediments and has treated more than 352 billion gallons

                                                                              FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                 11-49

-------
                                                     September 1999
                 EPA ANNOUNCES 750™
              CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION
      On  September  6,  2000,  EPA  completed
      construction at the Pepe Field site in Boonton, New
      Jersey, marking the 750th  National Priorities List
      Superfund site in  the country to reach the
      construction completion milestone since the
      program began in 1980. Senator Frank Lautenberg,
      Representative Rodney Frelinghuysen and others
      celebrated the successful cleanup of toxic gas-
      producing wastes and the restoration and re-
      opening of a community park and little league ball
      field.
      The three-acre park, located in a suburban area of
      90,000 residents, was closed after EPA named Pepe
      Field a federal Superfund site in 1982. The property
      was used from the 1920s to the 1950s as a landfill
      for wastes from the manufacture of edible oils and
      cleaning products for household and industrial use.
      EPA  performed extensive reevaluation  of the
      containment remedy and, in 1997, changed the long-
      term  cleanup plan, calling for the excavation of
      85,000 tons of waste and the removal to an off-site
      disposal facility.

O
of liquid-based waste  and contaminated water.  The
program has also supplied at least 356,000 people
residing at or near Superfund sites with alternative water
supplies to protect them from contaminated ground-
water and surface water.

    Following completion of cleanup activities and the
determination that the property no longer poses a threat
to human health or the environment, a site is removed
from the NPL. EPA removed 19 sites from the NPL in
FY 2000, for a total of 220 sites over the  life of the
program.

    An important element of managing the Superfund
Program is ensuring that questions of liability are settled
quickly and that Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs)
pay their fair share of cleanup costs. In FY 2000 PRPs
initiated more than 68  percent of new  long-term
cleanup actions at non-federal facility NPL sites, slightly
less than the 70 percent annual goal. Over the  past
3 years, however, private parties initiated approximately
74 percent of the new long-term cleanup  actions. In
FY 2000 EPA secured private party commitments for
cleanup and cost recovery valued in  excess of
                                                          $1.4 billion  (over $1.3 billion for future cleanup and
                                                          $145 million for recovery of EPAs past costs). Total
                                                          private party commitments for  cleanup and cost
                                                          recovery since the inception of the program are valued
                                                          at more than $18 billion (over $14.9 billion for cleanup
                                                          and more than $3.1 billion for recovery of EPAs past
                                                          costs), resulting  in  nearly  $7  in  private party

                                                             Over $18 Billion in PRP Commitments for
                                                               Cleanup and Cost Recovery Since 1980
                                                            1980  1982 1984  1986 1988 1990  1992 1994  1996 1998  2000
11-50
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
commitments for cleanup and cost recovery for every
$1  spent  on  Superfund enforcement.  These
accomplishments of the Superfund Enforcement
Program preserve the Superfund  Trust Fund, which
can be used for other Superfund cleanups.

    To ensure  that EPA's  enforcement  efforts are
effective and  at the same time fair, the Agency
recognizes that some PRPs might have contributed very
small amounts of waste to a site or that some parties
who contributed waste to the site are now insolvent or
defunct, commonly referred to as "orphan" parties. For
fairness EPA  is willing to enter into de minimis
settlements with such PRPs or offer to compensate
settling parties for the liability associated with orphan
parties. In FY 2000 the Agency entered into 18 de minimis
settlements with more than 1,000 parties. To date EPA
has entered into more than 460 de minimis settlements
to resolve the potential liability of  over 22,800 parties.
As an incentive for PRPs to conduct cleanup or pay for
cost recovery, EPA may make "orphan share offers" to
compensate for cleanup costs attributed to non-viable
parties. In FY 2000 the Agency made seven offers to
compensate settling parties for orphan shares, valued
at over $7.8 million, at eligible sites where EPA was
negotiating for future response work, meeting its goal.
EPA also  made an  additional  13 orphan  share
compensation offers, valued at over $11.2 million,
during cost-recovery negotiations. During the past 5
fiscal years (FY 1996-2000), EPA has offered more than
$194 million in orphan share compensation at 118 sites.

    EPA is also responsible for recovering costs in cases
where the Agency and others have  already taken action
to clean up  sites. EPA's intention is to address all those
cases approaching statute of limitations deadlines with
outstanding past cleanup  costs in  excess  of $200,000
each year. In  FY 2000 EPA addressed all but two of
these statute of limitations cases prior to expiration of
the statute  of limitations by negotiating settlements,
referring cases to the Department of Justice for
litigation, or  making a decision  not to  pursue cost
recovery when no viable PRP could be located. EPA
has made a decision to write off the costs associated
with these two  cases, and the documentation will be
made final during the second quarter of FY 2001.

RCRA Corrective Action

    The RCRA Corrective Action Program cleans up
contamination at  active industrial  facilities, a universe
of more than 3,500 facilities across  the country. The
most serious pollution problems at RCRA-regulated
facilities occur when hazardous waste releases migrate
off-site, contaminating public and private drinking water
supplies and endangering wetlands and other sensitive
ecosystems. On-site worker exposure is  also a serious
concern of this program. As a means of addressing
the most  critical problems  first,  EPA and its state
partners have established a list of more than 1,700 high-
priority facilities that  require corrective action.  In
addition EPA has established environmental indicators
for the control of toxic groundwater releases and
human exposures to measure intermediate progress at
RCRA sites  in  environmental  terms rather than
administrative steps.
    In FY 2000  EPA's Corrective Action Program
documented that human exposure to contamination is
under control at an additional 191 of the high-priority
facilities  and that  migration  of contaminated
groundwater is under control at an additional 168
facilities. Over the life  of the program, EPA and  its
state partners have documented that human exposures
have been controlled at a total of 642 facilities and that
migration of contaminated groundwater has been
controlled at a total  of 565 facilities. Although
cumulative facility totals remain ahead of the long- term
goals projected for the program in 1998, several sites
that had previously  been recorded as meeting the
environmental   indicators in  1999  had  their
determinations reversed because of new data provided
by authorized states. These included 26 sites previously
recorded for human exposures controlled and 43 sites
previously  recorded for  groundwater  releases
controlled. For additional information on the Corrective
Action Program accomplishments, visit  the EPA web
site, http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/ca/
index.htm.
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Cleanups

    EPA's Leaking Underground Storage Tank Program
promotes and implements rapid and effective responses
to underground storage tank (UST) releases. In FY 2000
this program assisted states,  tribes, and the regulated
community in completing  20,834 cleanups, for a
cumulative total of 249,760 cleanups since 1987.
    Two initiatives were developed in FY 2000  to
increase the  effectiveness and efficiency of future
cleanup work. USTfields for Abandoned Tanks was
designed  to  promote assessment  and cleanup  of
abandoned or closed USTs  located on Brownfields
I
                                                                                  FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                       11-51

-------
                National UST Corrective Action Activity
             Cumulative Over Time From FY 1991 - FY 2000
     450000
     400000
     350000
   !g 300000
   ™ 250000
   o
   J> 200000
   I 150000
   z
     100000
     50000
         0
          1991  1992  1993  1994   1995   1996   1997  1998   1999  2000
                     • Cleanups Completed   —•— Cleanups Initiated
                                Confirmed Releases
                                                              has exceeded its goals for the year. Through
                                                              the  third quarter of  FY 2000,  the
                                                              Brownfields Program worked successfully
                                                              in partnership with states,  tribes, local
                                                              communities,  and other  stakeholders to
                                                              leverage a total of $2.8 billion of private
                                                              funds for cleanup and redevelopment,
                                                              generate  more than  7,400 new jobs
                                                              benefitting disadvantaged communities,
                                                              and fund more than 2,000 assessments of
                                                              potentially contaminated sites.

                                                              Preventing Risk Through a Safe
                                                              Waste Management and Response
                                                              Infrastructure
                                                              RCRA Permitting
s
&
    properties. The Faster Cleanups initiative was created
    to increase the pace of  cleanups as a means of
    addressing the backlog of  160,000 identified releases
    yet to be cleaned up. Implementation of both initiatives
    will begin in FY 2001.
    Brownfields
        EPA's  Brownfields Program promotes the
    assessment, cleanup,  and sustainable  reuse of
    abandoned or underutilized industrial and commercial
    properties, which are present in nearly every community
    in the  nation. Although final  Brownfields data for
    FY 2000 are not expected until April 2001, analysis
    through the third quarter demonstrates that the program
 NATIONAL RECOGNITION FOR BROWNFIELDS
In FY 2000 the Brownfields Program was named one
of ten recipients of the Innovations in Government
Award granted by Harvard University's John F.
Kennedy School of Government, the  Ford
Foundation, and  the Council for Excellence in
Government. The  award honors innovative
approaches to addressing important public challenges.
The Brownfields Program was selected from a pool
of 1,300 applicants. In addition, the program was
honored in FY 2000 as a recipient of the National
Partnership for Reinventing Government Hammer
Award for innovations in government.
              The RCRA Permitting  Program
          establishes  a "cradle-to-grave" framework
that identifies a set of controls facilities should have in
place to ensure the safe management of hazardous
waste. During FY 2000 an  additional 308 hazardous
waste management facilities received permits or other
approved controls to verify protection against
dangerous releases to air, soil, and groundwater. Permits
or other approved controls can include  operating
permits, verified clean closures, and postclosure permits.
    The RCRA Program also successfully implemented
new tools  for  management of  environmental
information to support federal and state programs in
FY 2000.  RCRAInfo is  EPA's comprehensive
information system, replacing the data recording and
reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Information System and the Biennial
Reporting System. The RCRAInfo system  allows for
tracking of information on the regulated universe of
RCRA hazardous waste handlers, and characterization
of facility status, regulated  activities, and compliance
histories. The system also captures detailed data on the
generation  of hazardous waste  from large quantity
generators and on waste management practices from
treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. RCRAInfo is
web-accessible, providing a convenient user interface
for federal,  state  and  local managers. It encourages
development of in-house expertise to control cost and
incorporates use of off-the-shelf software for collection
of Biennial Report data.
11-52
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
Oil Spill Prevention. Control and Countermeasure
Compliance
    To address the more than 20,000 oil spills reported
to the  federal government each year, EPA's Oil Spill
Program works to ensure  compliance with the Spill
Prevention, Control and Countermeasures (SPCC)
requirements. In FY 2000, 678 additional oil  storage
facilities came  into  compliance with the SPCC
requirements, meaning that EPA significantly exceeded
its goal of bringing  400 additional  facilities into
compliance.
Underground Storage Tank Standards Compliance

    The focus  of the UST Program is to increase the
number of tank  owners  and operators in compliance
with EPA and state requirements for leak detection, as
well as the 1998 federal requirements to meet new tank
standards;  upgrade tanks  with spill, overfill,  and
corrosion  protection; or close substandard tanks
properly. EPA  estimates  that in FY 2000 about
86 percent of the 714,000  active  tanks were in
compliance with the spill, overfill,  and corrosion
protection requirements also known as the tank upgrade
requirements, and approximately 65 percent were in
compliance with leak detection requirements. In
addition, 82,500 substandard USTs were properly and
permanently closed in FY 2000,  bringing the  total
number of  permanently closed tanks to 1,460,000.
    Two initiatives were developed  in FY 2000 to
support UST  compliance programs: one  addresses
improving  operational compliance with established
requirements; the other  assesses  whether  UST
regulations  and systems  are working and determines
what changes  or other reforms may be necessary.
Implementation of both projects will begin in FY 2001.
Risk Management Planning

    Industrial accidents and other disasters involving
toxic chemicals and other hazardous substances are a
constant threat to human health and the environment.
In FY 2000, 917 facilities submitted Risk Management
Plans (RMPs) detailing contingencies, emergency
response procedures, hazardous substance inventories,
and disaster response scenarios, for a total of 15,069
plans submitted. EPA granted three states authority to
manage RMP programs, for a  total of ten states. In
response to concerns regarding public access to RMP
information, the Chemical Safety Information, Site
Security  and Fuels Regulatory Relief Act of  1999
required assessment of both the chemical risk reduction
benefits from allowing public access to off-site
consequence analysis information and the increased risk
of terrorist and other criminal activity from posting
the information on the Internet. Based on assessments
conducted by EPA and the  Department of Justice, a
final rule was promulgated in FY 2000 allowing public
access to the off-site consequence analysis portions of
the RMP  in ways that minimize the likelihood of
chemical accidents and the risk of terrorist or criminal
activity associated with Internet posting.
Radioactive Waste Management
    To ensure  protection from potential exposure to
radioactive waste, EPA conducts oversight, including
periodic inspections, to verify continued compliance
with radioactive waste disposal standards. In FY 2000
EPA certified that 1,760 55-gallon drums of radioactive
waste shipped by the Department of Energy  to the
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant were permanently disposed
of safely and according to EPA standards, for  a total
of 3,000 drums now in storage.

SUMMARY OF FY 2000  PERFORMANCE

    EPA has made significant progress toward meeting
the Goal 5 objectives through its FY 2000 performance
for waste programs,  as  demonstrated by  the
accomplishments  in cleaning up previously polluted
sites through the  Superfund, RCRA, UST and
Brownfields programs. Most long-term commitments
for waste programs are on track or ahead of schedule.
    Many of  the successes in FY 2000 are the
culmination of long-term program reforms and
initiatives. The  Superfund Program  underwent
significant improvements in operations, beginningwith
a management review in 1989 which led to three rounds
of administrative reforms initiated in 1993 through
1995. The reforms addressed seven major categories
(cleanups, enforcement, risk assessment, public
participation and environmental justice, economic
redevelopment, innovative technology, and state and
tribal empowerment). One  example of the cleanup
reforms is the ongoing initiative to update selected
remedies, which encourages review of cleanup decisions
at sites where new technologies, information, or other
advances offer the potential for more efficient and less
costly cleanups. As a result more than 300 remedies
have been updated, reducing estimated future cleanup
I
                                                                                 FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                     11-53

-------
•a
o
costs by more than $1.4 billion while incurring only
$129 million in additional estimated future costs, for a
projected savings of greater than 90 percent in estimated
costs.
    Another reform, the Superfund Redevelopment
Initiative (SRI), ensures that communities have the tools
and information needed to realize  the benefits of
reusing Superfund sites. Through FY 2000 SRI has
facilitated development of more than 250 options for
commercial, recreational, public service, ecological,
residential, or agricultural use of land at 190  sites.
Included among these sites  are 13,700 acres restored
for recreational and ecological purposes. EPA has
integrated all of the reforms into its base program
operations.  Through these efforts the  Superfund
Program  is protecting human health  and the
environment in ways that are faster, fairer, and more
efficient.

    There has also been significant progress in ensuring
that active industrial facilities regulated under the RCRA
Program  are managing their wastes safely and
preventing the migration of pollution. The  RCRA
Corrective Action Program, with its state partners, is
implementing reforms to meet national cleanup goals
faster through flexible approaches and results-oriented
guidance. The reforms, focusing on 1,700 high priority
facilities, have demonstrated considerable  success in
achieving intermediate cleanup measures at industrial
sites, paving the way for eventual cleanup  of
contamination at these sites.

STRENGTHENING PROGRAM  INTEGRITY
THROUGH IMPROVED MANAGEMENT

    The Agency has made  considerable progress in
addressing management issues under Goal 5 identified
by the  General Accounting  Office (GAO)  and EPAs
Office  of the Inspector General (OIG). EPA expects
to resolve remaining issues on Superfund remedial
contracts, Independent Government Cost Estimates
(IGCEs), Superfund 5-year reviews, and the  RCRA
corrective action program by the end of FY 2002. The
Agency has taken multiple steps to increase capacity
utilization of Superfund remedial contracts, while
containing and minimizing program management costs.
With respect to IGCEs, EPA established a national
workgroup and is taking action to ensure continued
improvement in the quality  and application of these
estimates. A plan has been put in place to eliminate the
backlog of 5-year  reviews while  maintaining the
schedule of timely 5-year reviews through FY 2002. In
addition the Agency is developing a number of RCRA
cleanup reforms to improve and streamline the cleanup
process and to better clarify how regions, states, and
facilities can approach cleanups more consistently.
Because of the progress EPA has made in addressing
Superfund management problems, GAO removed the
Superfund Program from the high risk list in the January
2001 update to the GAO High-Risk Series.
    Please see Section III - Management Accomplishments
and'Challenges'for a further discussion of the above issues.

RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS

    Research under Goal 5  supports efforts to reduce
or control risks posed to human health and the
environment by contaminated waste sites and improper
waste management by facilities. Research efforts in
FY 2000 were devoted  to improving methods for
measuring, monitoring, and characterizing complex
wastes in soils and groundwater; developing approaches
that enable risk assessors to accurately estimate the
amount of a contaminant found in a soil  matrix; and
developing more  cost-effective  technologies for
characterizing and remediating contaminated soils,
sediments,  and groundwater. Research focused on
understanding the fate, transport, and treatment of fuel
oxygenates, particularly methyl-tertiary butyl ether, to
help improve source control  to reduce  impacts on
drinking water supplies. Also in FY 2000 the Superfund
Innovative Technology Evaluation Program continued
to yield significant cost  savings through the use of
innovative  remediation  and  characterization
technologies. Additional research efforts were devoted
to providing multimedia, multipathway exposure and
risk methods and models for assessing the risks from
waste facilities, and to improving techniques to control
and prevent releases during waste management
activities.

PROGRAM EVALUATION

    The American  Society  for Testing and Materials
(ASTM) is  evaluating whether  risk-based decision-
making corrective actions forleakingUSTs are achieving
state agency management goals for the UST Program.
The study has reviewed five state programs employing
11-54
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
risk-based decision-making and will evaluate the impact
on overall performance. A series of bulletins, published
by ASTM beginning in March 1999, have been used to
report on progress and summarize findings. The second
bulletin, published in March 2000, addressed
development of performance measures for risk-based
decision-making programs. Information in the second
bulletin will be used to expand and update a risk-based
decision-making database that is used by state programs.

    As part of the RCRA cleanup reforms, EPA has
evaluated current practices and produced draft guidance,
Results-Eased Approaches to Corrective Action (available
through the  Internet at http://www.epa.gov/
epaoswer/hazwaste/ca/resource/guidance/
gen_ca/results.htm), promoting incorporation of
results-based cleanup approaches into delegated RCRA
program management. The comment period closed in
November 2000, and EPA anticipates publishing final
guidance in 2001. In addition two audits of the RCRA
Corrective Action Program were conducted in FY 2000
by EPAs OIG and GAO: RCRA Corrective Action "Focuses
on Interim Priorities - Better Integration with Final Goals Needed
(EPA OIG, 2000-P-0028, September 2000, http://
www.epa.gov/oigearth/audit/list900/
rcraaction.pdf), which assessed the  progress of the
RCRA corrective action program and  recommended
development of additional performance goals for the
restoration of waste sites at active facilities, and EPA
Has Removed Some Barriers to Cleanup (GAO/RCED-00-
224, August  2000, http://www.gao.gov), which
assessed several EPA actions to revise RCRA regulatory
requirements to remove cleanup barriers.
program for tribes. These measures cover operations
within the Superfund, chemical accident prevention,
leaking underground storage tank, and hazardous and
municipal solid waste management programs.

TABLES OF RESULTS

    The following tables of results include performance
results for  the  12 FY 2000 Congressional Annual
Performance Goals (APGs) that appear in Goal 5. In
cases where the FY 2000 APG is associated with an
FY 1999 APG, the table  includes the FY 1999 APG
below  the  FY 2000 APG for ease in comparing
performance. Where applicable, the tables note cases
where FY 2000 APGs are supported by state National
Environmental Performance Partnership System
(NEPPS) Core  Performance Measures (CPMs). As
described in more detail in Section I  of the report
("Overview and Analysis"), states use CPMs to evaluate
their  progress  toward mutual program goals.
Additionally EPA is providing information on FY 1999
APGs for which  data were not available when the
FY 1999 report was published.
ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS OF FY 2000
PERFORMANCE ON FY 2001 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE PLAN

    Many of the  FY 2000 performance goals and
measures will remain priorities for emergency response
and waste management programs through FY2001.
Based  on better-than-anticipated performance in
FYs 1999 and 2000, the annual performance targets
for Brownfields economic indicators and compliance
with the Oil Program's Spill Prevention, Control and
Countermeasure requirements have been raised. Also
EPA has added performance measures related to tribal
accomplishments in its FY 2001 annual plan, focusing
attention on developing and maintaining the waste
                                                  I
                                                                               FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                  11-55

-------
                                                FY 2000 Annual Report
                            Annual Performance Goals and Measures - Table of Results
I Summary FY 2000 Performance |
 [Tto8 fifei,  foi
                                               GOAL 5 - BETTER WASTE MANAGEMENT,
                                          RESTORATION OF CONTAMINATED WASTE SITES,
                                                      AND  EMERGENCY RESPONSE
                FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                               FY 2000
                                                                                          Planned    Actual
                                                                                                       FY 1999
                                                                                                       Actual
           BY 2005, EPA AND ITS PARTNERS WILL REDUCE OR CONTROL THE RISKSTO HUMAN HEALTH ANDTHE
            ENVIRONMENT AT OVER 375,000 CONTAMINATED SUPERFUND, RCRA, UST AND BROWNFIELD SITES.
       FY 2000 APG 30:   EPA and its partners will complete 85 Superfund cleanups (construction
                        completions) to achieve the overall goal of 900 construction
                        completions by the end of 2002.

       (FY 1999)         EPA and its partners will maintain the pace of cleanups by completing
                        construction at 85 additional Superfund sites (for a cumulative total of 670
                        construction completions with a target of 925 construction completions in
                        2002).

       Explanation:      Goal met. EPA exceeded its target, attaining a total of 87 construction
                        completions, for a cumulative total of 757 construction completions over the
                        life of the program.

       Data Source:      The Comprehensive Environmental Response and Compensation Liability
                        Information System (CERCLIS) tracks, stores, and reports Superfund/Oil site
                        information, including cleanup, cost recovery, and compliance status. The
                        system also records regional accomplishments on  Brownfields assessments.

       Data Quality:      Regional EPA staff are responsible for reviewing, verifying, and validating site
                        data for CERCLIS. Also,  several administrative controls are in place to assure
                        data accuracy. The Office of the Inspector General (DIG) reviews the
                        end-of-year Superfund reports to verify numbers for all performance
                        measures.  A General  Accounting Office (GAO) audit done to assess the
                        validity of data in CERCLIS estimated that the cleanup status of National
                        Priority List sites reported in CERCLIS is accurate for 95% of the sites.
                                                                                            85
                                                                                                      87
                                                                                                         85
s
&
•a
o
 FY 2000 APG 31:  Maximize all aspects of potentially responsible party (PRP)
                 participation, which includes maintaining PRP work at 70% of the new
                 remedial construction starts at non-Federal Facility Superfund sites,
                 and emphasizing fairness in the settlement process.

 (FY 1999)        Obtain PRP commitments for 70% of the work conducted at new construction
                 starts at non-federal facility sites on the National Priority List (NPL) and
                 emphasize fairness in the settlement process.

 Performance Measures
 - Orphan share offers at eligible work settlement negotiations.
 - De minimis settlements.

 Explanation:     Goal not met. Although the goal was not met, the long-term average is near
                 the 70% target, and the percentage of remedial construction starts initiated
                 by responsible parties has averaged 74% over the past three years. EPA
                 determines the  percentage of remedial construction starts conducted by
                 responsible parties at non-federal facility NPL sites. The annual percentage
                 depends on several factors, including the number of sites ready to begin
                 remedial action, whether work at those sites is financed by the responsible
                 party or Superfund, and the funding available for remedial  action starts. As a
                 result, the annual percentage may vary. In FY 2000 responsible parties
                 committed to funding remedial action at 64 of 94 sites that were ready for
                 remedial action (68%). To ensure fairness in the settlement process, EPA
                 successfully made orphan share offers at 100% of work settlement
                 negotiations. Of the 20 sites having small waste contributors that were
                 targeted for de minimis settlements in FY 2000, two were lead-acid battery
                 recycling  sites. In October 1999 Congress passed the Superfund Recycling
                                                                                           70%
                                                                                                      68%
                                                                                           100%

                                                                                            20
100%

 18
                                                                                                               80%
100%

 37
11-56
          EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------

FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES

Equity Act, which specifically exempted from Superfund liability generators of
certain recyclable materials, including lead-acid batteries. As a result the de
minimis parties at the two lead-acid battery sites were no longer liable under
Superfund, and EPA did not have to enter into settlements at these sites.
Data Source: Same as FY 2000 APG 30.
Data Quality: Same as FY 2000 APG 30.
FY 2000 APG 32: Ensure trust fund stewardship by recovering costs from PRPs when
EPA expends trust fund monies. Address cost recovery at all NPL and
non-NPL sites with a statute of limitations (SOL) on total past costs
equal to or greater than $200,000.
(FY 1999) Ensure trust fund stewardship by recovering costs from PRPs when EPA
expends trust fund monies. Address cost recovery at all NPL and non-NPL
sites with a statute of limitations on total past costs equal to or greater than
$200,000.
Explanation: Goal not met. Although the goal was not met, there was no loss in dollars
recovered. Cost recovery was addressed at 253 (or 98.5%) of NPL and
non-NPL sites with total past costs greater than or equal to $200,000. EPA
plans to write off costs associated with the two other SOL cases (1.5%), but
decision documents were not processed in a timely manner.
Data Source: Same as FY 2000 APG 30.
Data Quality: Same as FY 2000 APG 30.
FY 2000 APG 33: 172 (for a cumulative total of 649 or 38%) of high priority Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) facilities will have human
exposures controlled and 172 (for a cumulative total of 612 or 36%) of
high priority RCRA facilities will have ground-water releases controlled.

(FY 1999) 83 (for a cumulative total of 238 or 14%) of high priority RCRA facilities will
have human exposure controlled and 45 (for a cumulative total of 119 or 7%)
will have ground-water releases controlled.
Explanation: Goal met. An additional 191 high priority RCRA facilities have human
exposures controlled (for a cumulative total of 642 out of 1 ,714 total facilities,
or 37%). An additional 168 high priority RCRA facilities have groundwater
releases controlled (for a cumulative total of 565 out of 1,714 total facilities,
or 33%). While the cumulative totals for human exposures and groundwater
releases are slightly less than the FY 2000 targets, cumulative totals still
exceed 1998 projections for achieving long-term RCRA corrective action
goals. Variances in cumulative totals stem from changes in facility counts
following the provision of new data by authorized states, resulting in a change
of designation for environmental indicators being met at 26 sites for human
exposures controlled and 43 sites for groundwater releases controlled. There
were no changes in EPA procedures as a result of the reviews.
Data Source: EPA regions and authorized states enter data on a rolling basis into the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRAInfo),
which contains information on entities (generally referred to as "handlers")
that are engaged in hazardous waste generation and management activities
regulated under the hazardous waste part of RCRA.
Data Quality: RCRAInfo is the national database that supports the RCRA program. It has
user and system documentation that describes the overall administration of
data collection and management activities. Data screen edits help to ensure
that key data are entered for all facilities. States and regions are responsible
for managing data quality.
FY 2000


Planned






100%














172
172





























Actual






98.5%














191
168




























FY 1999


Actual










99%














162
188
























                           -
GPRA Performance
                      11-57

-------
             FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                                     FY 2000
                                                                                                             FY 1999
                                                                                               Planned    Actual
                                                                                                              Actual
        FY 2000 APG 34:  Complete 21,000 Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Cleanups
                         for a cumulative total of 250,000 cleanups since 1987.


        (FY 1999)         Complete 22,000 LUST cleanups.

        Explanation:      Goal met. EPA met the goal by providing assistance to its state partners in
                         completing approximately 21,000 cleanups, for a cumulative total of about
                         250,000 since 1987. Projections for outyear accomplishments demonstrate
                         that the FY 2005 goal of 332,000 cleanups completed, and the overall goal of
                         370,000 cleanups completed or initiated, will be achieved by or before
                         FY 2005.

        Data Source:      Designated state agencies  submit semiannual progress reports to regional
                         EPA offices.

        Data Quality:      Regional EPA offices verify reports from state agencies and then forward to
                         Headquarters. Headquarters staff examine the data and resolve any
                         discrepancies with the regional offices. There is no centralized database on
                         underground storage tank (LIST)  sites. EPA Headquarters has provided
                         guidance on standard definitions  for data reported.
                                                                                        21,000
20,834
                                                                                                             25,678
        FY 2000 APG 35:  EPA will provide additional site assessment funding to 50 communities,
                         resulting in a cumulative total of 1,900 sites assessed, the generation of
                         4,900 jobs, and the leveraging of $1.7 billion in cleanup and
                         redevelopment funds.

        (FY 1999)         EPA will fund Brownfields site assessments in 100 more communities, thus
                         reaching 300 communities by the end of 1999.

        Explanation:       Goal met. Although fourth quarter data are not available until April 2001, EPA
                         exceeded the goal as indicated by third quarter data that show cumulative
                         totals of 2,024 site assessments, generation of 7,446 jobs, and leveraging of
                         $2.8 billion in cleanup and redevelopment funds.

        Data Source:      Data are entered on a rolling basis into the Brownfields Management System
                         (BMS). BMS is used to evaluate environmental and economically related
                         results, such as jobs generated and acres assessed and remediated. Data
                         are gathered from Brownfields pilots' quarterly reports from grant recipients
                         and from the regions.

        Data Quality:      EPA prepared  and issued guidance to Brownfields grant recipients on
                         evaluating and reporting progress on performance measures. Regional staff
                         responsible for setting  up the grants conduct data quality reviews.
                                                                                         1,900
                                                                                         4,900
                                                                                         $1.7B
 2,024
 7,446
 $2.8 B
(at end
of third
quarter
 2000)
                                                                                                              80 (307
                                                                                                            cumulative)
I
•a
o
FY 2000 APG 36:  Ensure compliance with Federal facility statutes and Comprehensive
                 Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)
                 Agreements and ensure completion of current NPL CERCLA
                 Inter-agency Agreements (lAGs).

Performance Measures
 -  Complete NPL lAGs.
 -  Begin CERCLA Negotiations.

Explanation:     Goal not met. Issues raised by the responsible federal parties resulted in
                 delays in completing four of the six targeted NPL lAGs. EPA is continuing its
                 efforts to compel the federal parties to complete these four remaining lAGs.
                 Since the beginning of FY 2001, two outstanding NPL lAGs have been
                 completed, and negotiations are scheduled to address the two remaining
                 outstanding lAGs. The Agency also began negotiating the four planned
                 CERCLA lAGs during the year, but only one of these was properly reflected
                 in the database (as indicated in the "actual" column).

Data Source:     Same as FY 2000 APG 30.

Data Quality:     Same as FY 2000 APG 30.
                                                                                                                        No
                                                                                                                     FY 1999
                                                                                                                       APG
11-58
          EPA's FY2000 Annual Report

-------
     FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                          FY 2000
                                                                                     Planned   Actual
                    FY 1999
                     Actual
FY 2000 APG 37:  Enhance scientifically defensible decisions for site cleanup by
                 providing targeted research and technical support.

Performance Measures
 -  Report of natural attenuation case studies of methyl-tertiary butyl ether (MTBE).
 -  Deliver Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) report to Congress.
 -  Report of key research on methods, models and factors relating to risk evaluation of dermal
   route of exposure.
 -  Review 20 soil contaminants and develop screening levels.

Explanation:      Goal not met. EPA made progress toward this goal by documenting cost
                 savings and clean up decisions based on research through the SITE Report
                 and other technical support programs, although finalization of several reports
                 was delayed. The summary report for MTBE case studies was delayed until
                 April 2001  because the original scope was expanded to include more than
                 four sites, thus strengthening the data supporting the report. The SITE  report
                 was delivered to OMB in fiscal year 2000, but the delivery date to Congress
                 was delayed due to time required for OMB approval. The report on the dermal
                 exposure route was delayed until December 2000 due to time required for
                 peer review.

Data Source:      Agency generated material.

Data Quality:      As required by the Agency-wide formal peer review policy issued in 1993,
                 and reaffirmed in 1994 and 1998, all major scientific and technical work
                 products used in Agency decision  making are independently peer reviewed
                 before their use. EPA has implemented a rigorous process of peer review for
                 both its in-house and extramural research programs. Peer review panels
                 include scientists and engineers from academia, industry, and  other federal
                 agencies.
                       No
                     FY 1999
                      APG
   1
9/30/00

9/30/00

9/30/00
   0
1/30/01

12/31/00
9/30/00
  BY 2005, OVER 282,000 FACILITIES WILL BE MANAGED ACCORDING TO THE PRACTICES THAT PREVENT
     RELEASES TO THE ENVIRONMENT, AND EPA AND ITS PARTNERS WILL HAVE THE CAPABILITIES TO
   SUCCESSFULLY RESPONDTO ALL KNOWN EMERGENCIESTO REDUCETHE RISKTO HUMAN HEALTH
                                          ANDTHE ENVIRONMENT.
FY 2000 APG 38:  106 more hazardous waste management facilities will have approved
                 controls in place to prevent dangerous releases to air, soil, and
                 groundwater, for an approximate total of 67% of 2,900 facilities.

(FY 1999)         122 hazardous waste management facilities (for a cumulative total of 61% of
                 3,380 RCRA facilities) will have permits or other controls in place.

Explanation:      FY 2000: Goal met. EPA exceeded its goal by documenting approved
                 controls for 308 additional RCRA hazardous waste management facilities, for
                 a cumulative total of 1,802 facilities. The Agency was able to exceed this goal
                 due to establishment of definitions for non-permitting approved controls at
                 hazardous waste management facilities, accounting for a high number of
                 facilities that needed minor administrative work, the completion of an
                 extensive data cleanup effort, and improved  relationships  with state partners.
                 The percentage of  cumulative accomplishments against the baseline has
                 been adjusted to reflect ongoing improvements to RCRA data systems. For
                 FY 2001 and beyond, the facility baseline has been adjusted to 2,750.

                 FY 1999: Goal met. Based on information received in FY 2000, EPA
                 exceeded its FY 1999 target. 149 RCRA hazardous waste management
                 facilities were determined to have permits or other controls in place.

Data Source:      Same as FY 2000 APG 33.

Data Quality:      Same as FY 2000 APG 33.
  106
            308
                      149
                                                                                                                       -
                                                                                                 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                                   11-59

-------
CV OAAA A MMI IAI DCDC/"\DIVfl A M/^C /"*/"\ A 1 O A Ml^ RflCAOIIDCO
FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
FY 2000 APG 39: 400 additional facilities will be in compliance with the Spill Prevention,
Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) provisions of the oil pollution
regulations (for a cumulative total of more than 1,500 facilities since
1997).
(FY 1999) 190 additional facilities will be in compliance with the SPCC provisions of the
oil pollution regulations (for a cumulative total of 490 additional facilities since
1997).
Explanation: Goal met. EPA has exceeded its goal due to implementation of an expedited
inspection and compliance monitoring program. FY 2001 targets have been
adjusted to account for this new program.
Data Source: Same as FY 2000 APG 30.
Data Quality: Same as FY 2000 APG 30.
FY 2000 APG 40: Enhance scientifically defensible decisions for active management of
wastes, including combustion, by providing targeted research and
technical support.
(FY 1999) Complete prototype model for assessing cumulative exposure-risk
assessment integrating the environmental impact of multiple chemicals
through multiple media and pathways.
Performance Measures
- Develop provisional toxicity values for 10 to 20 waste constituents.
- Provide one journal article on factors that control mercury speciation in incinerators.
Explanation: Goal met. EPA met the goal of providing targeted research and technical
support for the active management of wastes by preparing nine provisional
toxicity values from 38 feasibility assessments on 25 waste constituents. The
journal article on factors that control mercury speciation in incinerators was
published in FY 2000.
Data Source: Same as FY 2000 APG 37.
Data Quality: Same as FY 2000 APG 37.
FY 2000 APG 41: 90% of USTs will be in compliance with EPA/state December 22, 1998
requirements to upgrade, close or replace substandard tanks.

Explanation: Goal not met. 86% of USTs demonstrated compliance with the 1998
requirements to upgrade, close, or replace substandard tanks. The original
target was based on equipment changes to LIST systems. However, EPA has
changed the focus of compliance from simply having the required equipment
to properly operating that equipment as well. As a result a number of states
have reported compliance rates based on operational compliance (rather
than "equipped to comply") which led to a lower overall compliance figure.
Improving reporting while maintaining flexibility under the program is a
near-term goal of the Agency.
Data Source: Same as FY 2000 APG 34.
Data Quality: Same as FY 2000 APG 34.
FY 2000
Planned
400


















9/30/00
1







90%













Actual
678


















9/30/00
1







86%













FY 1999
Actual




774










9/30/99












No
FY 1999
APG











I
•a
o
11-60
             EPA's FY2000 Annual Report

-------
FY 1999 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS WITHOUT CORRESPONDING FY 2000 GOALS
(ACTUAL PERFORMANCE DATA AVAILABLE IN FY 2000 AND BEYOND OR WITH PERFORMANCE TARGETS
BEYOND FY 2000)

FY1999APG:
Explanation:
Data Source:
Data Quality:
Demonstrate and verify the performance of 18 innovative technologies
by 2001, emphasizing remediation and characterization of groundwater
and soils.
Goal met. As of the end of FY 2000, 25 innovative technologies have been
demonstrated and verified (seven in FY 1999 and 18 in FY 2000).
Same as FY 2000 APG 37.
Same as FY 2000 APG 37.
Planned
11



Actual
18



                           -
GPRA Performance
                      11-61

-------
   Goal 6 FY 2000 Obligations
               S230M
                                   GOAL 6: REDUCTION OF GLOBAL AND
                                 CROSS-BORDER ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS
                            The United States will lead other nations in successful multilateral
                            efforts to reduce significant risks to human health and ecosystems
                              from climate change, stratospheric ozone depletion, and other
                                            hazards of international concern.
    Note: EPA FY 2000 Obligations
         were $8,974 million
OVERVIEW

    Environmental hazards, like ecosystems, are not
limited by national borders. Transboundary circulation
of toxic chemicals; marine pollution; depletion of the
stratospheric ozone layer; climate change; safety issues
posed by the international trade in chemicals, pesticides,
and biotechnology products; and similar global issues
all pose significant risks to the United States. Unilateral
domestic actions and investments cannot adequately
protect the well-being of people or the environment
from such risks. Therefore, collaboration with other
countries and tribal nations is essential in protecting
not only the domestic environment but also the global
environment. Agency programs address this need by
fostering multilateral cooperation on environmental and
trade issues and enhancing foreign countries' technical
capacity for addressing environmental risks globally.

FY 2000 PERFORMANCE

Ensuring a Healthy and Sustainable Environment
Along the U.S.-Mexico Border

    The U.S.-Mexico Border XXI Program continues
to make progress in  addressing the region's serious
environmental  problems. For example, air emissions
inventories and monitoring networks, which serve as the
basis for local air quality management plans, are in place
in the three largest border sister cities (which have a total
U.S.-Mexican population of more than five million).
There have been dramatic improvements  in the
availability of water and sewer services in the border area,
primarily because of partnerships with the Border
Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) and the
North American Development Bank, including the EPA
funded Border Environment Infrastructure Fund. Thirty
BECC-certified projects  are in various stages of
construction or have been built in the border area, and
they ultimately will serve about seven million border
residents. Six sister-city pairs now have contingency plans
to respond to chemical emergencies, and systems are in
place to allow cross-border responses to hazardous
substance incidents. The two countries have established
a mechanism to provide information to the public about
new and existing treatment, storage, and disposal facilities
for hazardous and radioactive wastes. In addition a system
to track hazardous waste returned to the United States
for disposal will ensure  safe disposal and to serve as an
enforcement tool.

Restoring and Maintaining the Great Lakes Basin
Ecosystem

    The Great Lakes Basin contains one-fifth of  all the
world's surface fresh water (six quadrillion gallons of
water, enough to cover the entire conterminous United
States to a depth of about ten feet). Environmental data
on  the health of the basin are  indicating  some
improvement, yet some areas show no sign of recovery.
EPA's  ability to assess environmental progress and
challenges in the Great Lakes Basin was further enhanced
in FY 2000 with the release of 31 reports on proposed
comprehensive,  basin-wide indicators  (http://
www.on.ec.gc.ca/solec/indicators2000-e.html).

    In partnership with states, EPA continues to address
challenges in the Great Lakes. In FY 2000 the Agency
accelerated the development of Lakewide Management
Plans, issued a plan for each lake in April 2000, and
approved six state programs tailored to protect the water
quality of the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Program
reported the following  developments in FY 2000:
•   There was a small increase in reported Great Lakes
    beach closures in 1999  as a  result of beach
    managers' adopting closing criteria more protective
                                                                                FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                    11-63

-------
•i
a
    of human health and conducting more frequent
    monitoring.

•   Concentrations of polychlorinated biphenyls
    (PCBs) and pesticides in the air continue to decline;
    however, concentrations of polynuclear aromatic
    hydrocarbons in the air (from combustion of fossil
    fuels and other organic substances) have remained
    relatively constant.

•   Fish advisories continue for all of the Great Lakes
    as a result of toxic contaminants from the air and
    sediments; for example, PCB concentrations in
    Lake Michigan coho salmon are ten times higher
    than the health protection value.

•   Oxygen depletion in the Central Basin of Lake Erie
    indicates potential for increasing severity  of
    problems such as excess phosphorus and difficulty
    sustaining bottom-dwelling fish and other biota.

•   New  invasive  species are expected  to have
    ecosystem and  economic impacts;  for  example,
    Daphnia lumholt^i, a small crustacean, was recently
    identified as  the 160th aquatic invasive species in
    the Great Lakes.

    In FY 2000 EPA also continued to address
contaminated sediments, a major source of fish and
wildlife  contamination  in  the  Great  Lakes.
Contaminated  sediments have contributed  to
impairments to more than 2,000 miles (20 percent) of
shoreline  and to the fish consumption advisories in
place throughout the Great Lakes. More than 1,600,000
cubic yards of contaminated sediments have been
remediated  during  the  past  4 years (http://
www.epa.gov/glnpo/sediments.html).

Protecting The Northwestern Border

    The United States and its multilateral partners ended
the first phase of a project to help Russia manage PCBs
in an environmentally sound manner and thereby comply
with pertinent international agreements. Although
estimated PCB stocks and releases are  considerable,
preliminary reviews indicate that the quantities might be
underestimated. Once high-priority sources have been
identified and feasibility studies completed, Russia will take
corrective  measures that ultimately  will  reduce the
environmental releases of PCBs and long-range transport
from Russia. In turn this reduction will lower the bio-
uptake of PCBs not only in Russia but also in Alaska and
other receiving areas.
                                                          Addressing Global Climate Change
                                                             Through EPA's climate  program, the Agency is
                                                          delivering real greenhouse gas emissions reductions by
                                                          identifying and addressing  opportunities to reduce
                                                          energy waste and to prevent emissions of potent
                                                          greenhouse gases associated with the public and private
                                                          sectors, including consumers. For 2000 and beyond
                                                          EPA's objective is to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas
                                                          emissions to levels consistent with international
                                                          commitments under the Framework Convention on
                                                          Climate Change, building on initial efforts under the
                                                          Climate Change Action Plan. For FY 2000 EPA is on
                                                          track to meet its greenhouse gas emissions reduction
                                                          target of 58 million metric tons of carbon equivalent
                                                          (MMTCE). Data will be available in spring 2001.

                                                          Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPA Climate
                                                              Change Technology Initiative Programs
                                                             60
                                                         ra
                                                         o
                                                             50
    40
                                                           ~ 30
                                                         O JU
                                                         'E g
                                                         o> .5
                                                         s*
    20
                                                             10
                                                                     Annual Accomplishments
                                                                     Annual Goals
                                                                  1995
                                                                        1996
                                                                               1997
                                                                                      1998
                                                                                             1999
                                                                                                    2000
    The  core of EPA's  climate  change  efforts is
government-industry partnership programs designed to
overcome  the barriers that limit  investments by
consumers, businesses, and other organizations in cleaner
or more efficient  technologies. Energy-efficient
technologies provide a sizable opportunity for limiting
emissions of greenhouse gases  while simultaneously
improving local air quality and saving money for both
businesses and consumers. EPA's climate change program
has shown results by meeting emission-reduction goals
and demonstrating cost-effectiveness.  Based  on actions
taken by partners in the voluntary programs, EPA reports
the following results  through 1999:

•   Annual greenhouse gas emission reductions
    equivalent to eliminating the emissions from about
    18 million cars.
11-64
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
•   Annual reductions in emissions of nitrogen oxide
    (NOJ totaling over 100,000 tons, equivalent to the
    annual emissions from 70 power plants.
•   Continued emission reductions from actions already
    taken by program partners of more than 20
    MMTCE per year through 2010.

    Cars, trucks, aircraft, and other components of the
nation's transportation system emit about one-third of
total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Transportation
policies, plans, and choices have an immense effect on
greenhouse gas emissions, particularly on carbon
production. Although technology and market-oriented
measures will make a major contribution toward
reducing emissions, efforts to reduce vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) are  also critical  for achieving EPAs
greenhouse gas emission reduction goals. To this end
in FY 2000 EPA actively supported voluntary regional,
state, and community efforts that encourage additional
travel choices and alternatives to single-occupancy
vehicle driving. An example of  these efforts is  the
national Commuter Choice program that was launched
in 2000 to achieve VMT reductions. Commuter Choice
programs encourage employers  to  provide their
employees transportation options in commuting to and
from work, such as free or reduced cost passes for public
transportation, opportunities to carpool, telecommuting
options, and incentives to bike or walk.

    In addition EPA joined six other federal agencies,
along with Ford, General Motors, andDaimlerChrysler,
in the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles
(PNGV), an ongoing program to develop  a new
generation of safe, attractive, affordable vehicles with
ultra-low emissions and high fuel efficiency. In FY 2000,
as part of the PNGV program, EPA demonstrated 72
mpg (gasoline equivalent) on a mid-size research chassis
using a state-of-the-art  diesel engine and  an EPA-
invented, patented, and developed hybrid drivetrain.

Restoring the Ozone Layer

    The stratospheric ozone layer protects life on earth
from harmful ultraviolet (UV) radiation. Scientific
evidence amassed over the past 25 years indicates that
the use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and other
halogenated chemicals has resulted in the destruction
of stratospheric ozone. In FY 2000 EPA furthered the
nation's commitment to assisting in the restoration of
the ozone layer by tracking, through a marketable permit
system, industry compliance with regulatory restrictions
on the consumption of ozone-depleting substances.
Although continued U.S. commitment to these
restrictions is essential to halting the destruction of
ozone in the stratosphere,  the participation  of
developing countries is also key to ensuring the timely
restoration of the ozone layer.  U.S. leadership in
international negotiations during FY 2000 led to  an
agreement with China, the largest consumer of ozone-
depleting substances among  developing countries.
China will now reduce its use of ozone-depleting
solvents at a faster rate than that to which it originally
agreed.
    Scientists anticipate that by the end of this decade
the stratospheric  ozone hole will stop growing.
However, because ozone-depleting substances have a
long life and were emitted for many years before EPAs
restrictions and the international agreement, the public
is faced with potentially unhealthy levels of UV
radiation. Recognizing this, during FY 1999 EPA
launched the Sun Wise School Program to promote sun
safety practices. The program's  goal is to protect
children from skin cancer, cataracts, and  other long-
term UV-related health effects. Sun Wise now reaches
more  than 10,000 children between the  ages of five
and 15 in 42 states across the nation, and the list of
participating schools is growing. Pre- and post-program
surveys of participating students show that the program
has already begun to increase the  level of knowledge
among children about ways to reduce their exposure to
harmful UV radiation. More importantly the students
are  demonstrating their knowledge. In FY 2000 EPA
set  a  target that 60 percent of children in Sun Wise
schools would be very likely to use Healthy People 2000
"safe  sun" practices. EPA has found, however, that an
"all of the time" standard is more likely to be associated
with greater risk reduction and less disease. Using this
revised metric, in FY 2000 the proportion of Sun Wise
children who  used  sunscreen all  of the time was  26
percent; hats, 18 percent; long-sleeve shirts, 23 percent;
and sunglasses,  25 percent.  The action steps
recommended by SunWise are provided at http://
www.epa.gov/sunwise/actionsteps.html.
   SunWise-Y
     •  •  v •< .••  ;: i >i '>  • nrililit  {   -.!•••
                                                                                FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                    11-65

-------
•a
o
Reducing Circulating Chemicals

    EPA made progress in FY 2000 toward reducing
the risks to U.S.  human health and ecosystems from
selected toxics that circulate in the environment at global
and regional scales. Under the auspices of the North
American   Commission   for   Environmental
Cooperation, the United States, Canada, and Mexico
prepared a second-phase North American  Regional
Action Plan (NARAP)  for mercury, which calls  for
ending specific mercury uses where  there is an
unreasonable or otherwise unmanageable risk of release
to the environment or risk to human health. However,
because of the countries' differences in levels of priority
and effort devoted to mercury risk reduction, economic
conditions, and technological and infrastructure
capabilities, they did  not  establish time lines  for
completing the activities set forth in the nonbinding
mercury NARAP.

    EPA expanded its mercury monitoring network in
FY 2000 to collect additional  data on the long-range
transport and transformation of mercury. Through this
monitoring, EPA and its partners are contributing the
data required for modeling through the placement of
new air quality monitors in coastal Alaska. These new
monitors will determine the relative apportionment
between domestic and international sources of mercury
that concentrates in fish (the primary exposure route
for humans). Having  such apportionments will permit
EPA to focus domestic emission control efforts and
international risk management initiatives, all of which
are intended to  minimize  mercury releases  to  the
environment and thus decrease exposures to mercury.
This effort supports  domestic obligations under  the
Clean Air Act, as well as those made in  the mercury
NARAP and other agreements.

    The negotiations  on a legally binding  global
convention on persistent organic pollutants (POPs)
such as dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) were
successfully concluded in December 2000. It is  not yet
clear, however, whether  international financial
institutions, the  United States, and other developed
countries will be able to offer levels of capacity-building
support sufficient to prompt key developing countries
to sign and comply with the global POPs convention.
Finally, EPA and other member countries  of  the
Organization for  Economic  Cooperation  and
Development completed work on five harmonized test
guidelines, a protocol of consistent international testing
                                                         guidelines based on a combination of standard U.S. and
                                                         European chemical toxicity testing procedures.

                                                         Increasing Harmonization and Environmental
                                                         Capacity

                                                             In establishing a greater  connection between the
                                                         environment and trade, EPA, workingwith other federal
                                                         agencies, contributed to  the development and
                                                         implementation of Executive Order (E.O.)  13141,
                                                         Environmental Review of Trade Agreements. In addition to
                                                         EPAs  analysis of the potential regulatory effects  of
                                                         trade agreements, under  the E.O. the Agency will
                                                         contribute to the "core analysis" by estimating changes
                                                         in various categories of pollution in the United States
                                                         that could be expected from the trade agreement. When
                                                         fully implemented in 2001, E.O. 13141 will represent
                                                         one of the most significant policy contributions to the
                                                         environment and trade debate because comprehensive
                                                         trade  agreements potentially touch every natural
                                                         resource through the primary and secondary effects of
                                                         tariff changes, removal of nontariff trade barriers, and
                                                         rule changes.

                                                             High-quality environmental information plays a
                                                         vital role in building capacity to address  global
                                                         environmental problems. The Agency's international
                                                         environmental information efforts have  expanded
                                                         rapidly during the past several years. In FY 2000 EPA
                                                         completed its first International  Environmental
                                                         Information Inventory and used the resulting data to
                                                         develop  the  Agency-wide Strategic  Plan for
                                                         International  Environmental Information. This  plan
                                                         will help EPA track new international information
                                                         programs, ensure that programs do not duplicate
                                                         efforts, and target scarce  resources as  effectively as
                                                         possible. Toolkits were also developed and designed to
                                                         help other countries enhance their environmental
                                                         libraries  and to locate, through the  Internet,
                                                         environmental information from around the world.

                                                         SUMMARY OF FY 2000 PERFORMANCE

                                                             EPA has long been recognized as the leading source
                                                         of environmental regulatory and management expertise
                                                         worldwide. The direct benefit to U.S. citizens and their
                                                         environment  resulting  from this involvement
                                                         underscores the importance of ensuring an active and
                                                         continuing international  presence. EPA  has made
                                                         progress in its efforts to  advance protection  of the
11-66
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
global commons. There has been progress in protecting
the ozone layer, and progress is being made to reduce
the increasing rate of greenhouse gas emissions. Treaties
and binding conventions such as the Global POPs are
under way and are advancing the ideal of sustainable
environmental growth. People along the U.S. border in
various municipalities have  access  to  water and
wastewater treatment for the  first time.  Continued
progress will rely greatly on the Agency's ability to
achieve agreement on key global negotiations and on
its ability to sustain support  for this work.

RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS

    In FY 2000 EPA research and assessment activities
examined the potential consequences of climate change
for human health and ecosystems in the United States.
EPA assessed the possibility of changes in disease
patterns due to  changing climate; the impact of heat
stress on  populations, especially senior citizens and
children; the air pollution-related health effects of
climate change;  and the socioeconomic consequences
of extreme weather events. Researchers also analyzed
the impact of climate change  and variability on the
ability of ecosystems to provide the services that  many
people rely on but often take for granted, such as  water
filtration and air purification. In an effort to understand
how climate change might affect life in the United States,
EPA sponsored the Great Lakes, Mid-Atlantic, and Gulf
Coast Regional Assessments, as well as the Health Sector
Assessment, as part of the U.S. Global Change Research
Program's First National Assessment of the  Potential
Consequences of Climate Variability and Change for
the United States. The assessments provide stakeholders
and policy makers with information on the  potential
risks and  opportunities presented by climate change
and offer options  for adapting to the changes.

STRENGTHENING PROGRAM INTEGRITY
THROUGH IMPROVED MANAGEMENT

    EPA's Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
evaluated the Great Lakes Program at the  Agency's
request to provide advice and assistance  on how to
improve the Lakewide Management Plan  (LaMP) and
Remedial Action Plan processes and develop and
implement effective national strategies and agreements.
The Agency undertook several actions consistent with
the OIG's recommendations, including accelerating the
development of LaMP documents that were published
for the Great Lakes in FY 2000; reinstituting the Great
Lakes U.S. Policy Committee, including states, tribes,
and other federal agencies; and developing a tracking
system to address the issues. Efforts will continue
toward improving the Great Lakes Strategy and clearly
identifying the responsibilities of EPA program offices
and regions, states, and Canada to fully support the
restoration and maintenance of the chemical, physical,
and biological integrity of the Great Lakes.
    Please see Section III - Management Accomplishments
and'Challenges'for a further discussion of the above issues.

PROGRAM EVALUATION

    EPA's Great Lakes Program regularly consults with
federal,  state,  and tribal  governmental agencies
responsible for setting strategic directions for Great
Lakes environmental protection. In FY 2000 EPA
responded to FY 1999 consultations and evaluations
by reinstituting the Great Lakes U.S. Policy Committee.
The consultations and evaluations were conducted as a
series of meetings  and did  not result in a published
report.
    Pursuant to a congressional request, the General
Accounting  Office (GAO)  reviewed the partnership
between the federal government, including EPA, and
three domestic automobile  manufacturers (the
Partnership for a New Generation  of Vehicles
(PNGV)), focusing on the  following aspects: (1) the
progress made to date toward achieving the partnership
goals; (2) the historical federal funding levels; (3) the
technologies being developed under PNGV; and (4) a
comparison  of the overall research and development
activities of the automobile manufacturer participants
with research sponsored by the partnership.

    In its letter "Cooperative Research: Results of U.S.-
Industry Partnership to Develop a New Generation  of
Vehicles" (Letter, March 30, 2000, GAO/RCED-00-
81, http://www.gao.gov), GAO noted, "While
progress has been made toward the goals of the PNGV
partnership,  technological and affordability obstacles
still need to be overcome. It is not yet possible to assess
if the partnership is improving U.S. competitiveness  in
manufacturing, its first goal. The partnership is making
progress towards its  second goal of implementing
                                                                                  FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                     11-67

-------
•a
o
commercially viable innovations in conventional
vehicles. In addition the partnership has made progress
toward its third goal, releasing concept cars by March
2000 that manufacturers stated demonstrate the ability
to achieve nearly 80 miles per gallon. However, the
manufacturers and National Research Council stated
that significant technological and affordability obstacles
remain."

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS OF FY 2000
PERFORMANCE ON FY 2001 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE PLAN

   Development  of  EPA's  FY 2001  Annual
Performance Goals (APGs) and measures under Goal 6
was guided by FY 2000 performance results. In some
instances data indicated no change in course. Most
programs are on track toward meeting the strategic goal.
In other cases, however, the  Agency made dramatic
changes. For example the Agency's decisions to pursue
enhanced involvement in trade negotiations and
liberalization agreements in  FY 2000 have focused
greater attention on analyzing and participating in trade
agreements affecting U.S. environmental regulations as
EPA implements the E.O. on environmental review; In
addition, the following programs reassessed their
direction in FY 2001 based on FY 2000 performance:

•  Great Lakes Basin ecosystem. The depletion of oxygen
   in the Central Basin of Lake Erie indicates potential
   problems, which will be explored further  in
   FY 2001. Identification  of  the  160th invasive
   species has reinforced the urgency of EPA and its
   partners making progress on technology to prevent
   the further introduction  and  spread of invasive
   species. Projects are exploring the use of filtration,
   as  well as the use  of UV light,  for secondary
   treatment of ballast water, and are looking at the
   impacts  of "No Ballast on Board" vessels. The
   FY 2001 performance measures for Great Lakes
   Ecosystem Assessment have been revised to
   measure  ecological trends,  a  significant
   improvement over  FY 2000 measurement of
   outputs.

•  O^pne depletion. EPA's successful performance  in
   FY 2000 is reflected in its FY 2001 ozone layer
   restoration  goals.  The goals will  include
   implementing the next  regulatory step  in the
   phaseout of methyl bromide, implementing a
   market-based allowance allocation system for
                                                           hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC) production and
                                                           importation, increasing the number of developing
                                                           countries helped by U.S.  assistance through the
                                                           Multilateral  Fund, and  improving childlren's
                                                           knowledge of the importance of proper sun
                                                           protection by expanding the  SunWise School
                                                           Program to include 20 percent more children across
                                                           the country.

                                                        •   Circulating chemicals. EPA's performance in FY 2000
                                                           is reflected in the Agency's FY 2001  goals for
                                                           increasing the number of mercury transport
                                                           monitoring stations operating in North America
                                                           and elsewhere (e.g., Russia), as  well as its targets
                                                           for POPs capacity-building projects.


                                                        TABLES OF RESULTS

                                                           The following tables of results include performance
                                                        results for the 12 FY 2000 APGs that appear in Goal 6.
                                                        In cases where the FY 2000 APG is  associated with an
                                                        FY 1999 APG, the table includes the FY 1999 APG
                                                        below  the  FY 2000 APG for ease in comparing
                                                        performance.
11-68
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
                 FY 2000 Annual Report
Annual Performance Goals and Measures - Table of Results
FuWtfMpMVuVtf GOAL 6 - REDUCTION OF GLOBAL &
iBHJBUJIBHil CROSS-BORDER RISKS

FY 9000 ANNUAI PFRFORMAMPF fiOAl ^ AND MFA^URF^
i I Ł.\J\J\J nMMlfnL. t ^V\t\J rilvlnli w^ V^WHLw nMLJ IVI^nOlfrl^O
FY 2000

Planned
Actual
FY 1999

Actual
BY 2005, REDUCE TRANSBOUNDARY THREATS TO HUMAN HEALTH AND SHARED ECOSYSTEMS IN NORTH
AMERICA CONSISTENT WITH OUR BILATERAL AND MULTILATERAL TREATY OBLIGATIONS IN THESE AREAS,
AS WELL AS OURTRUST RESPONSIBILITY TO TRIBES.
FY 2000 APG 42: Five additional water/wastewater projects along the Mexican border will
be certified for design-construction for a cumulative total of 30 projects.
(FY 1999) One additional water/wastewater project along the Mexican Border will be
certified for design construction.
Explanation: Goal met. The goal for FY 2000 was exceeded by five projects due to the
more rapid implementation of the process that has been developed and
refined by all Border partners. The cumulative total of water/wastewater
projects certified for design-construction along the Mexican border is actually
36 projects, rather than the 30 projects cited in the APG.
Data Source: Manual system.
Data Quality: Data are manually verified.
FY 2000 APG 43: Measurable improvements in Great Lakes ecosystem components.
Performance Measures

- Indicator Indices.
- Model predictions for toxics reductions.
Explanation: Goal met. The goal for FY 2000 was to improve the capacity for measuring
environmental outcomes by developing better models and indicators. This
year protocols for the ten indices were developed for Limnology (Trophic
State, Dissolved Oxygen, and Swimmability), Atmospheric (PCBs, Pesticides,
and PAHs), Biology (Benthic Community Health), Sediments (Sediment
Quality and Remediation), and Fish Contaminants (Safety for Wildlife
Consumption and Safety for Human Consumption). Outcome reporting will
begin in FY 2001 .
Modeling illustrates that atrazine does not appear to breakdown after it enters
the lake; consequently, with continued use, its concentration in Lake Michigan
will likely increase.
Data Source: Data comes from the Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) base
monitoring program, which is a cooperative effort of EPA, the Great Lakes
states, U.S. Geological Survey, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Data Quality: GLNPO has a Quality Management system in place which conforms to the
new EPA quality management order. GLNPO is audited every three years in
accordance with federal policy for Quality Management. There is greater
uncertainty regarding the representativeness of data collected in near shore
areas because of the greater variability of the near shore environment.
5













9
5



















10













10
5





















9








No
FY 1999
APG





















                                                        FY 2000 GPRA Perfomance
                                                                          11-69

-------
FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
FY 2000
Planned
Actual
FY 1999
Actual
BY 2000 AND BEYOND, U.S. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS WILL BE REDUCED TO LEVELS CONSISTENT
WITH INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENTS AGREED UPON UNDER THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE
CHANGE, BUILDING ON INITIAL EFFORTS UNDER THE CLIMATE CHANGE ACTION PLAN.
FY 2000 APG 44: Assess the consequences of global climate variability at a regional
scale.
(FY 1999) Conduct preliminary assessment of consequences of climate change at
three geographical locations: (Mid-Atlantic, Gulf Coast, and upper Great
Lakes.)
Explanation: Goal met. Results from the three EPA-sponsored Regional Assessments
(Mid-Atlantic, Great Lakes, and Gulf Coast) were included in the First U.S.
National Assessment report, "Climate Change Impacts on the United States:
The Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change." Mandated
by Congress in the Global Change Research Act of 1990 and organized by
the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), this is the first
comprehensive assessment of the potential impacts of climate change on
the United States.
Data Source: Agency generated material.
Data Quality: As required by the Agency-wide formal peer review policy issued in 1993,
and reaffirmed in 1994 and 1998, all major scientific and technical work
products used in Agency decision-making are independently peer reviewed
before their use. EPA has implemented a rigorous process of peer review for
both its in-house and extramural research programs. Peer review panels
include scientists and engineers from academia, industry and other federal
agencies.
FY 2000 APG 45: Assist 10 to 12 developing countries with economies in transition in
developing strategies and actions for reducing emissions of
greenhouse gases and enhancing carbon sequestration.
Explanation: Goal met.
Data Source: Manual system.
Data Quality: Data are manually verified.
FY 2000 APG 46: Demonstrate technology for a 70 mpg mid-size family sedan that has
low emissions and is safe, practical, and affordable.
Explanation: Goal met. EPA demonstrated 72 mpg (gasoline equivalent) on a midsize
research chassis using a state-of-the art diesel engine and an EPA-invented,
patented, and developed hybrid drivetrain.
Data Source: EPA uses Fuel Economy Test data for both urban and highway test cycles
under the EPA Federal Test procedure for passenger cars. EPA fuel economy
tests are performed at the National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory in
Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Data Quality: The EPA fuel economy tests are performed in accordance with the EPA
Federal Test Procedure and all applicable quality assurance/quality control
procedures. The EPA's National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory is
recognized as the world state-of-the-art facility for fuel economy and
emissions testing.
FY 2000 APG 47: Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions will be reduced from projected levels
by more than 58 million metric ton of carbon equivalent (MMTCE) per
year through EPA partnerships with businesses, schools, state and
local governments, and other organizations thereby offsetting growth in
greenhouse gas emissions above 1990 level by about 20%.
3
10
70 mpg
58
3
10
72 mpg
Data
available
in Spring
2001
2
No
FY 1999
APG
No
FY1999
APG

•a
o
11-70
             EPA's FY2000 Annual Report

-------
FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
(FY 1999) Reduce U.S. GHG emissions by 35 MMTCE per year through partnerships
with businesses, schools, state and local governments, and other
organizations.
Explanation: FY 2000: EPA is on track to meet its FY 2000 GHG emissions reduction
target of 58 MMTCE.
FY 1999: Goal met. Based on information received in FY 2000, EPA
exceeded its FY 1 999 target of 35. Reductions came from energy star
program and multiple sectors including buildings, waste, industrial methane,
transportation, and state and local programs.
Data Source: Baseline data for carbon emissions related to energy use comes from the
Energy Information Agency (EIA). Baseline data for non-carbon dioxide (CO2)
gases are maintained by EPA. EPA reports on facility specific energy-saving
improvements. A carbon-conversion factor is used to convert this information
to estimated GHG reductions. EPA thus maintains a tracking system of
emissions reductions based on the reports submitted by its partners.
Data Quality: EPA has a quality assurance process in place to check the validity of partner
reports. Peer-reviewed carbon-conversion factors are used to ensure
consistency with generally accepted measures of GHG emissions. EPA
regularly evaluates the effectiveness of its climate programs through
interagency evaluations. A 1997 audit by EPA's Office of the Inspector
General concluded that the climate programs the were examined "used good
management practices" and "effectively estimated the impact their activities
had on reducing risks to health and the environment.. ."The voluntary nature
of the program may affect reporting. Some of the data are indirect measures
of GHG emissions modeled using conversion factors and methods to convert
material-specific reductions to GHG emissions reductions.
FY 2000 APG 48: Provide analysis, assessment, and reporting support to Administration
officials, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the
Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Performance Measure
- Greenhouse Gas Inventory.
Explanation: Goal met. The Greenhouse Gas Inventory serves as a basis for national
actions by countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.
Data Source: Information is compiled in accordance with appropriate guidance from the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and other bodies,
using data primarily from statistical agencies and scientific literature.
Data Quality: All products are subject to internal governmental review as well as full public
review. Secondary data used in analysis are generally peer reviewed during
development.
FY 2000 APG 49: Reduce energy consumption from projected levels by about 60 billion
kilowatt hours, resulting in over $8 billion in energy savings to
consumers and businesses that participate in EPA's climate change
programs.
Explanation: EPA is on track to meet its target.
Data Source: EPA collects partner reports on facility specific improvements (e.g., space
upgraded, kWh reduced).
Data Quality: Same as FY 2000 APG 47.
FY 2000
Planned

1
60
Actual

1
Data
available
in
FY 2001
FY 1999
Actual
46
No
FY1999
APG
No
FY 1999
APG
GPRA Performance
                      11-71

-------
FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
FY 2000
Planned
Actual
FY 1999
Actual
BY 2005, OZONE CONCENTRATIONS IN THE STRATOSPHERE WILL HAVE STOPPED DECLINING AND SLOWLY
BEGUN THE PROCESS OF RECOVERY.
FY 2000 APG 50: Provide assistance to at least 50 developing countries to facilitate
emissions reductions toward achieving the requirements of the
Montreal Protocol.
Explanation: Goal met.
Data Source: EPA measures the progress toward international implementation goals by
tracking the number of countries receiving assistance, dollars allocated to
each, and the expected reduction in ozone-depleting substances in assisted
countries. EPA and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
maintain the database.
Data Quality: EPA receives periodic reports on the financial status of participating
countries from UNER Information from UNEP is then cross-checked with
Agency records to ensure accuracy.
FY 2000 APG 51 : Restrict domestic consumption of class II hydrochlorofluorocarbons
(HCFCs) below 15,240 ozone depletion potential-weighted metric tons
(ODP MTs) and restrict domestic exempted production and import of
newly produced class I chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and halons below
60,000 ODP MTs.
(FY 1999) Ensure that domestic consumption of class II HCFCs will be restricted to
below 208,400 Mts and domestic exempted production and import of newly
produced class 1 CFCs and halons will be restricted to below 130,000 MTs.
Explanation: FY 2000: EPA is on track to meet its targets.
FY 1999: Goal met. Based on information received in FY2000. EPA met its
FY 1999 target.
Data Source: EPA tracks progress on restricting domestic consumption of Class II HCFCs
by monitoring industry reports of compliance with phaseout regulations. EPA
maintains these data in its Allowance Tracking System (ATS) database.
Data Quality: The ATS data are subject to a Quality Assurance Plan. In addition the data
are subject to an annual Quality Assurance review. The ATS is programmed
to ensure consistency of the data elements reported by companies.
Inconsistent data are flagged by the tracking system for review and
resolution by the tracking system manager. The ATS receives monthly
information on domestic production, imports and exports from the
International Trade Commission. This information is then cross-checked with
compliance data submitted by reporting companies. Regional inspectors
perform inspections and audits on-site at producers, importers, and
exporters facilities. These audits verify the accuracy of compliance data
submitted to EPA.
50
<1 5,240
<60,000
50
Data
available
in
FY 2001
No
FY1999
APG
<208,400
<130,000
BY 2005, REDUCE THE RISKS TO U.S. HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOSYSTEMS FROM SELECTED TOXICS THAT
CIRCULATE IN THE ENVIRONMENT AT GLOBAL AND REGIONAL SCALES CONSISTENT WITH
INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS.
2000 APG 52: Successfully conclude international negotiations on a global
convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) reaching
agreement on POPs selection criteria, technical assistance, and risk
management commitments on specified POPs.
(FY 1999) Obtain international agreement on criteria for selecting POPs to be covered
in a new global POPs treaty, and on capacity-building activities to support
the convention's implementation.
9/30/00
12/15/00
12/15/00
•a
o
11-72
             EPA's FY2000 Annual Report

-------
     FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                        FY 2000
                                                                                   Planned   Actual
                   FY 1999
                   Actual
Explanation:     FY 2000:  Goal met. The global POPs treaty was concluded in December
                2000. Although negotiations were delayed by 3 months into the next fiscal
                year, the target was met.

                FY 1999:  Goal not met. The achievement of this goal was met during FY 2000.

Data Source:     Manual system.

Data Quality:     Data are manually verified.
     BY 2005, INCREASE THE APPLICATION OF CLEANER AND MORE COST-EFFECTIVE ENVIRONMENTAL
              PRACTICES ANDTECHNOLOGIES INTHE UNITED STATES AND ABROAD THROUGH
                                      INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION.
FY 2000 APG 53:  Deliver 30 international training modules; implement six technical
                assistance/technology dissemination projects; implement five
                cooperative policy development projects; and disseminate information
                products on U.S. environmental technologies and techniques to 2,500
                foreign customers.

(FY 1999)        Deliver 30 international training modules; implement six technical assistance/
                technology dissemination projects; implement five cooperative policy
                development projects; and disseminate information products on United
                States environmental technologies and techniques to 2,500 foreign
                customers.

Explanation:     Goal met. EPA met the overall goal. Although efforts on one of the four
                performance measures fell short, efforts on another performance measure
                greatly exceeded the target. The same number of people were  reached, just
                through individual process, rather than through training modules. This
                shortfall in the delivery of the modules can be attributed to (1) leveling off of
                EPA funds, (2)  maturation of our programs, and (3) less demand than
                originally anticipated. EPA fulfilled all  requests for training from  countries that
                were able to supply their share of the costs.

Data Source:     Manual system.

Data Quality:     Data are manually verified.
 30
  6
  5
2,500
 12
  6
  5
3,100
                     16
                     6
                     6
                    2,500
                                                                                               GPRA Performance
                                                                                                                 11-73

-------
   Goal 7 FY 2000 Obligations
             S142M
   Note: EPA FY2000 Obligations
       were $8,974 million
   GOAL 7:  EXPANSION OF AMERICANS' RIGHT
     TO KNOW ABOUT THEIR ENVIRONMENT
  Easy access to a wealth of information about the state of their
local environment will expand citizen involvement and give people
tools to protect their families and their communities as they see fit.
Increased information exchange between scientists, public health
  officials, businesses, citizens, and all levels of government will
     foster greater knowledge about the environment and what
                    can be done to protect it.
OVERVIEW

    EPA's right-to-know goal reflects the Agency's
commitment to provide the public with information
that will help protect human health and safeguard the
natural environment. The American public has a right
to know about the quality of the air it breathes, the
water it drinks, and the food it eats.

    The Agency has shifted the focus of Goal  7 to
better reflect the priorities set by the Agency when it
centralized information policy,  management,  and
technology in a new Office of Environmental
Information. EPA's vision for  Goal 7  is  that
environmental information be a strategic resource to
enhance public health and environmental protection.
This vision, adopted in EPA's revised Strategic Plan that
was issued in September 2000,  should influence
activities at  every stage of the information life cycle:
creation, storage and management, and analysis and
dissemination. This new  vision retains the Agency's
commitment to the public's right to know about the
environment, and strengthens  it with  a  new
commitment  to ensure  the quality, availability,  and
security of meaningful environmental information.
    To attain this vision, the Agency focused on  four
major areas during FY 2000: protecting and enhancing
the quality of environmental information; integrating
information; improving access to information; and
strengthening information security to keep pace  with
new threats  and technology.

FY 2000 PERFORMANCE

    FY 2000  proved to be a successful year for
information management in EPA. The Agency achieved
all of its annual performance goals and measures under
                       Goal 7 and  made progress toward the vision of
                       information as a strategic resource to enhance public
                       health and environmental protection, particularly in the
                       four main areas of focus.

                       Protecting and Enhancing the Quality of
                       Environmental Information
                          To  ensure the  strong leadership needed for
                       improving the quality of EPA's information,  EPA
                       established the Quality and Information Council (QIC)
                       made up of representatives from the Agency's senior
                       management. In FY 2000 the QIC presided over an
                       assessment of the quality of information in  four of
                       the Agency's data systems. The assessment showed that
                       the data in these systems are of high quality  and are
                       appropriate for their intended uses. The QIC also began
                       to develop a Data Quality Strategy that will be the
                       blueprint for enhancing the quality of environmental
                       information.

                          To  address the quality of data in EPA's publicly
                       available data sets, EPA  developed and implemented
                       the Integrated Error Correction Process (IECP) for
                       reporting and resolving errors identified by the public.
                       The IECP was implemented in the Envirofacts Facility
                       Information system (http://www.epa.gov/enviro) in
                       May 2000  and has made error-reporting tools more
                       prominent and easier to use. Itis now used for 11 major
                       EPA data systems.

                       Integrating Information

                          To improve the management, utility, and availability
                       of environmental information, in FY 2000 the states
                       and EPA began a joint effort to plan a comprehensive
                       data exchange network that will provide a wide range
                       of information that can be shared among EPA, states,
3
 :
                                                                              FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                 11-75

-------
I
    tribes, localities, the regulated community, and other
    data partners. The national network will extend beyond
    past EPA information integration efforts and ensure
    that future integration efforts by EPA and its partners
    and stakeholders are consistent and  complementary.
        EPAs information integration priorities in FY 2000
    emphasized creating the building blocks needed for the
    exchange network including establishing common data
    standards  for environmental information systems,
    creating a  centralized system for electronic data
    exchange, and establishing an electronic registry for
    facility identification information.
    For integration efforts to succeed, the Agency must
continue  to  strengthen  its partnerships  with
stakeholders. EPA, the states, and tribes established the
Environmental Data Standards Council (EDSC)  to
identify and develop the next set of data standards to
be  used  in collecting, storing, and retrieving
environmental data in their respective systems.  In
FY 2000 the Agency and its partners took several steps
toward easing the reporting burden,  facilitating data
integration, and improving data quality. EPAs Central
Data Exchange  received official Toxics Release
Inventory (TRI) submissions from 80 facilities in Illinois
via the Internet. The Agency received the first file with
a digital signature from Pennsylvania  and also began
testing data exchanges with six other states,  hoping to
conduct exchanges with additional states in FY 2001.
The Facility Registry  System, a centrally managed
database that identifies facilities subject to
environmental   regulations   or    of
environmental interest, is now populated
with more than 70,000 records. This  system
will contain 250,000 records by September
2001.
    EPA and its partners are moving toward
a shared information network. The Agency's
One-Stop Reporting Program creates
incentives  for   states   to  reinvent
environmental information management
practices  through grants and technical
assistance. States have undertaken a number
of  activities under One-Stop, including
expanding web sites to improve access;
establishing  links to EPA databases;
integrating isolated, media-specific data sets;
and implementing geographic information
systems (GIS) to map facility locations.
Additional information on the One-Stop
       program can be found at http://www.epa.gov/
       reinvent/onestop. In FY 2000 the One-Stop Program
       met its goal to increase the number of  states
       participating in the program by nine. There are currently
       34 states in the program.

       Improving Access to Information

           FY 2000 brought a number  of  significant
       achievements in the TRI Program, which publishes data
       on toxic pollutants released into the environment. It is
       one of EPAs most visible right-to-know programs. On
       May 11, 2000 the Agency released the 1998 TBJ Public
       Data Release Report, which included data for seven new
       industry sectors, including electric utilities; metal mining;
       coal mining; chemical wholesalers; petroleum terminals;
       solvent recovery;  and hazardous waste  treatment,
       storage, and disposal facilities. These sectors accounted
       for nearly 2,000 new  facilities and more than  15,000
       chemical reports addressing nearly five billion pounds
       of toxic chemicals, increasing the quantity of chemicals
       accounted for in the TRI Database by 67 percent. The
       1998 TRI  data  are available on EPAs web  site  at
       http://www.epa.gov/tri/tri98. The chart, which
       displays trend data for the core set of TRI chemicals
       and manufacturing sectors (that is, it  does not include
       data from the seven new industry sectors), shows  a
       marked decrease in releases  over the past 10 years.
       [Note: Goal 4 contains a more in-depth discussion of
       the trends in the volume and toxicity  of TRI wastes.]
                                                     TRI Releases, 1988-1998 (using the 1988 core set of
                                                           chemicals and manufacturing sectors)
                                                 3500
                              Off-site Land/Undergound Injection
                              Land (on-site)
                              Underground Injection (on-site)
                              Surface water
                              Air
1988 1989  1990 1991 1992  1993 1994  1995  1996 1997  1998
  Total releases to air, land, water and underground injection have decreased
  by 1.5 billion pounds or 45% since 1988. Data from the seven new industry
  sectors that began reporting in 1998 are not included in this graphs.
11-76
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
    In May 2000 EPA upgraded the TRI Explorer, an
Internet tool that provides fast and easy access to reliable
environmental information, making it easier  for the
public to identify facilities and chemical release patterns
in their communities. The latest version provides three
times the amount of information available in the
previous version and is available on EPA's web site at
http://www.epa.gov/triexplorer.
    Under the TRI Program, EPA is responsible for
establishing reporting thresholds for chemical releases
to the environment. In FY 2000 the Agency published
a final rule  lowering the TRI reporting thresholds for
persistent bioaccumulative  toxic (PBT) chemicals and
adding  seven more  PBT chemicals and two PBT
chemical compound  categories to the  list of toxic
chemicals subject to reporting. The first  year of PBT
chemical reporting was calendar  year 2000  and the
reports are  due to EPA by July 2001.

    The Agency met or exceeded all of its established
annual performance measures for the TRI Program.
These included publishing  the 1998  TRI Public Data
Release Report, processing 119,000 TRI submissions and
revisions from industry,  and continuing work on
peripheral modules to the  new version of the TRI
System.

    EPA also remains committed to providing real-time
monitoring  data to  communities  through its
Environmental Monitoring for Public Access  and
Community Tracking (EMPACT) program (http://
www.epa.gov/empact/index.htm). The EMPACT
Program has continued to expand its assistance to local
communities in building capacity for real-time
monitoring, management, and communication of
environmental information. Currently the program,
through a network of more than 300 community-based
partners, has helped implement real-time environmental
monitoring projects in over  90 cities across the United
States. These partnerships include  state and local
governments, tribes, federal agencies, non-pro fit groups,
universities, and other private organizations. In addition
to providing grants directly to local communities and
supporting projects that partner  EPA program  and
regional offices with local communities, the EMPACT
Program has moved into new areas  to  increase the
public's right to know through the institution of
technology transfer and  integration/networking
projects. These projects will allow  the transfer of
existing EMPACT projects  into new communities, as
well as the integration of data from multiple projects
to  provide  a more  comprehensive  source  of
information in a specific community.
    EPA reached another milestone in increasing the
public's access to environmental information that affects
their lives on a daily basis. During FY 2000 most
Americans received their first annual drinking water
quality report from their local water supplier. October
19, 1999 was the first federal deadline for these
consumer confidence reports, which tell consumers of
public water systems the source of their local tap water,
contaminants  detected, the likely source  of  the
contaminant,  health advice  for  sensitive populations,
and where to go for more information. These reports
represent the  most widespread right-to-know
information provided directly to consumers in EPA's
history. Water systems and states were extremely
successful in getting  these reports out  on time.
Approximately  53,500  community water systems,
serving approximately 253 million people, met the
statutory deadline.

    Communities have a right to know about the different
forces that affect their local environments. EPA's Sector
Facility Indexing Project (SFIP) uses the Internet to
provide the public with facility-level  information in five
industrial sectors and is being expanded to also include a
subset of federal facilities. The database brings together
existing information  from  a number of Agency data
systems and can provide  data on a facility's compliance
and enforcement history, production capacity, releases
and spills, and the demographics of the surrounding
community in a single location on the Internet (http://
www.epa.gov/oeca/sfi). EPA  is also committed to
making its enforcement-related policy  and guidance
documents available to the public. In FY 2000 the
national enforcement and compliance assurance program
exceeded its goal by making 94 percent of its policy and
guidance documents available through the Internet. Refer
to the Tables of Results for further explanation, including
a discussion of the Integrated Data for Enforcement
Analysis system (IDEA), a tool designed specifically for
states, local governments, and federal agencies to access
enforcement data.
    EPA is working to ensure that no segment of the
population or no community bears  a disproportionate
amount  of burden from adverse environmental
conditions. The Agency manages an  assistance program
to help communities; state, tribal, and local government
9
g1
                                                                                   FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                       11-77

-------
    agencies; grassroots organizations; and other non-
    governmental organizations become knowledgeable
    about environmental laws, and to address  local
    environmental and human health concerns. In FY 2000
    EPA's Environmental Justice Small Grants Program
    awarded 62 grants totaling approximately $900,000. The
    Agency  has also continued to  improve public
    consultation by  working with  the  National
    Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC),
    which was established in  1993,  and particularly by
    increasing the number of meetings that focus on issues
    (such as permitting) that are central to the concept of
    environmental justice for all.

        EPA's web site (http://www.epa.gov) continues
    to be an important tool for providing the public with
    access to environmental information and its popularity
    continued to grow in FY 2000.  Statistics  from the
    month of September 2000 showed a 47 percent increase
    in the number of visitors over the  same period in
    FY 1999. Also, in a recent survey by Federal Computer
    Week, EPA's site  ranked  in the top  15 most effective
    web sites based on the utility of  the information on
    the site, its organization,  and ease  of use. The number
    of pages EPA offers reached 525,796 (an 88 percent
    increase over FY 1999), and the number of other sites
    with links to the EPA site grew to 796,103 (a 25 percent
    increase over FY 1999).

        For Earth Day 2000 EPA released a new, more user-
    friendly version of its web site that included improved
    search capabilities and introduced the popular topics
    format common  to most informational sites. The new
    organization and topic buttons help users quickly get
    to where they want to go. The "Browse EPA" topics
    page has been enhanced so that visitors can more easily
    find the information they need within 16 main topic
    areas, including water, air,  pollution prevention,
    enforcement, and environmental management. The
    Agency has received many favorable comments on the
    redesign from visitors to the site.

    Strengthening Information Security

        The availability and reliability of environmental
    information depend on the security of the technology
c,-   platform on which the information resides. EPA made
O
«   substantial progress toward ensuring the security of its
^   information assets in FY 2000. Following an audit by
?   the  General Accounting Office  (GAO),  EPA
J   temporarily disconnected its network from the Internet
                                                         to accelerate installation of improved security features.
                                                         Since February 2000 the Agency has taken steps to
                                                         further separate the entire EPA Wide Area Network
                                                         from the Internet; implement better approaches to
                                                         monitor, detect, and deter Internet  attacks and
                                                         unauthorized users;  conduct  formal reviews  of
                                                         information security plans; update EPA's regulations for
                                                         handling confidential business information and
                                                         implementing the Freedom of Information  Act to
                                                         ensure adequate protection of information; and increase
                                                         the Agency's efforts to create a more security-conscious
                                                         workforce.
                                                            To  underscore the importance of these efforts,
                                                         during  FY 2000 EPA established a special Technical
                                                         Information Security Staff to provide  a focal point for
                                                         protecting the Agency's information. The staff reports
                                                         directly to the Agency's  Deputy  Chief  Information
                                                         Officer for Technology and is responsible  for rapid
                                                         enhancement of EPA's technical approach to protecting
                                                         the  integrity of information. EPA will  continue
                                                         addressing potential threats to its information systems
                                                         in FY 2001.

                                                         STRENGTHENING PROGRAM INTEGRITY
                                                         THROUGH IMPROVED MANAGEMENT

                                                            EPA's  major information-related management
                                                         challenges-identified in one or more audits conducted
                                                         by EPA's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and
                                                         GAO-focus on several major themes:
                                                         •   Information management. EPA must  continue  to
                                                            improve the management, comprehensiveness,
                                                            consistency, reliability, and accuracy of its  data to
                                                            help better measure performance  and achieve
                                                            environmental results.
                                                         •   Information system security. EPA must  enhance the
                                                            security of its information systems by minimizing
                                                            the possibility  of unauthorized  access, use,
                                                            modification, or destruction of the Agency's
                                                            information resources.
                                                         •   Data accuracy and error correction. EPA must improve
                                                            data completeness, compatibility and accuracy.
                                                         •   Filling data gaps.
                                                         •   Improving the collection of accurate data.
                                                         '   Implementing a quality assurance program Agency-wide and
                                                            with the states.
11-78
        EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
•   Implementing procedures for data error detection and
    correction.
    As the discussion in preceding sections of this
chapter shows, EPA, with a focus  on information
quality, integration, access, and security,  is working to
address  these management  issues. Although
considerable progress was made in FY 2000, much
remains to be done. Information management at EPA
will be greatly enhanced with the development of a
comprehensive  Information Plan that establishes the
framework for strategically identifying the information
the Agency needs; matches the information  and
technology resources to meet the need; and establishes
processes for addressing information needs, identifying
potential  data collection efficiencies, and seeking out
opportunities to leverage information resources from
outside EPA. Also  the environmental information
exchange network will require effort by EPA, the states,
and tribes to move from its current fledgling stage to a
fully operational network. Cultural and organizational
changes in the way EPA, the states, and tribes plan for
and implement new information systems  and make
improvements to existing systems will be needed. EPA
will continue to  improve the quality of its information
systems and ensure that the Agency has management
procedures in place to maintain an effective,  consistent
quality system. These efforts will remain a priority for
the QIC in the future. EPA must also retain its vigilance
over information security and take steps  to ensure use
of the best available information security tools.

    Many of  the  Agency's programmatic and
enforcement decisions are based on environmental data
produced by EPAs research and analytical laboratories.
Data that are timely  and of the appropriate quality are
critical to understanding environmental processes and
to making decisions that will support the protection of
human health and the environment. The OIG has noted
some concerns  about  the quality of laboratory data,
which led the Agency to declare laboratory quality
systems practices as an internal Agency weakness. EPA
completed technical reviews of its regional laboratories
during FY 2000 and  will complete reviews of the
remaining Agency laboratories in FY 2001. Section III,
FY 2000  Management  Accomplishments and
Challenges, provides additional discussion on ongoing
and  future corrective actions that will ensure all
environmental  data submitted to and used by the
Agency, whether from EPAs or other laboratories, are
produced using appropriate systems and controls and
meet the Agency's data quality needs.
    Please see Section III - Management Accomplishments
and Challenges tot a further discussion of the above issues.

RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS
    Research under Goal 7 supports efforts to enhance
the Agency's ability to protect human health and the
environment by providing sound environmental
information to federal, state, local, and tribal partners.
FY 2000 research concentrated on the development of
data interpretation and risk communication tools to
provide timely, relevant information to the public and
environmental decision makers. Research results that
assist in environmental decision-making were provided
to internal  and external  users through various tools,
databases,  manuals,  and guidance.  For example in
FY 2000, considerable progress was made in developing
and populating the Environmental Information
Management System  (EIMS), a web-based inventory
that focuses on the organization of  descriptive
information  (metadata)  for data sets,  databases,
documents, models,  projects, and spatial data.  The
EIMS design also provides a repository for scientific
documentation that can be easily accessed with standard
web browsers at http://www.epa.gov/eims/
eims.html. Research  results in FY 2000 also provided
consensus human health assessments of environmental
substances  of high priority to EPA, which were then
incorporated  into  the Integrated Risk Information
System and made publicly available  at http://
www.epa.gov/iris/index.html.  EPA believes  it is
important for local government bodies and individuals
to have access to this information, which can help them
make more informed choices to protect human health
and the environment.

PROGRAM EVALUATION

    In the past few years GAO and OIG have released
more than  a dozen audit reports that address issues
related to  information quality and information
management at EPA.  These reports have guided work
toward improving information management, quality,
and security.
    In addition  to the findings of GAO and OIG, the
Agency's TRI  Program obtained an independent
3
 r
                                                                                 FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                     11-79

-------
    assessment of its effort to develop newTRI reporting
    software for industry. The new system, called Toxics
    Release Inventory Made Easy (TRI-ME), will replace
    the Automated TRI Reporting Software (ATRS,
    available at http://www.epa.gov/tri/atrs/). TRI-
    ME, which is more user-friendly than ATRS, will be
    made available to  the public to  assist businesses in
    determining whether or not they need to file TRI
    reports.  If they are  required to  submit reports, the
    system will provide the necessary forms. The assessment
    of the TRI-ME project concluded that TRI-ME is a
    beneficial and technically achievable project. Version 1.0
    of TRI-ME will be released in spring 2001 as a pilot.
TABLES OF RESULTS

    The following tables of results include performance
results for the five FY 2000 Congressional APGs that
appear in Goal 7. In cases where the FY 2000 APG is
associated with an FY 1999 APG, the table includes
the FY 1999 APG below the FY 2000 APG for ease in
comparing performance. Additionally EPA is providing
information on FY 1999 APGs that are not associated
with any APGs in FY 2000.
    ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS OF FY 2000
    PERFORMANCE ON FY 2001 ANNUAL
    PERFORMANCE PLAN

        FY 2001 Annual Performance Goals (APGs) under
    Goal 7 reflect successful  performance  in and
    performance  measurement improvements  over
    FY 2000. For example, the APG for enhanced public
    access to environmental information includes  a target
    for all ten regions to have a web site with region specific
    enforcement and compliance information. This APG
    also includes several new measures in FY 2001 focused
    on increasing  the availability of environmental
    information on the Internet. In FY 2000 and continuing
    in FY 2001, the Agency has been moving from a focus
    on public right to know to a broader focus on quality
    environmental information for all decision makers. As
    the new organizational structure for information
    management has taken  shape, the Agency has  been
    working to refocus the long-term goal and objectives
    to reflect EPAs vision of information as a strategic
    resource for improving  environmental protection. In
    FY 2002 the Agency expects to refocus its annual goals
    and targets to reflect better this broader vision.
I
r^
•a
o
11-80
        EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
                                         FY 2000 Annual Report
                     Annual Performance Goals and Measures - Table of Results
I Summary FY 2000 Performance
    GOAL 7 - EXPANSION OF AMERICAN'S
RIGHTTO KNOW ABOUTTHE ENVIRONMENT
         FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                  Planned    Actual
                                                                      Actual
  BY 2005, EPA WILL IMPROVE THE ABILITY OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROTECTION
   OF HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY INCREASING THE QUALITY AND QUANTITY OF GENERAL
       ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION, OUTREACH AND DATA AVAILABILITY PROGRAMS, ESPECIALLY IN
                   DISPROPORTIONALLY IMPACTED AND DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES.
 FY 2000 APG 54:  The Agency will streamline and improve the information reporting
                 process between state partners and EPA by increasing the number of
                 state participants in the One Stop Reporting program from 29 to 38.

 (FY 1999)        The Agency will streamline and improve the information reporting process
                 between state partners and EPA by increasing the number of participants in
                 the One Stop Reporting program (for a total of 29).

 Explanation:       Goal met. In FY 2000 "One Stop" added nine additional states to its roster of
                 participants for a cumulative total of 34. [Note: The FY 2000 baseline (29
                 states) and target (38 states) did not take into account the lower than
                 expected performance in FY 1999 (25 States).]

                 EPA is now in the process of awarding $500,000 demonstration grants to
                 these nine additional states to further their data integration efforts, improve
                 data access, and reduce reporting burden. Additional information on the One
                 Stop program can be found at http://www.epa.gov/reinvent/onestop/.

 Data Source:     Manual system. EPA tracks the number of state participants in  the program.

 Data Quality:     Data are manually verified. There are no limitations on the use  of this data.
                                                                                  38 states
                                                                                            34 states
                                                                     25 states
 FY 2000 APG 55:  Improve public access to compliance and enforcement documents and
                 data, particularly to high risk communities, through multimedia data
                 integration projects and other studies, analyses and communication/
                 outreach activities.

 Performance Measures
  1. Percent of OECA policy and guidance documents available on the Internet.
  2. Increase by 50% the number of states with direct access to Integrated Data for Enforcement
    Analysis (IDEA).

 Explanation:     Goal met.

                 1.  The Agency provides access to a wide array of compliance and
                    enforcement documents and data via the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/
                    oeca. In FY 2000 EPA's enforcement programs made 2,146 documents
                    available.

                 2.  The Agency is also working to improve state access to EPA data systems.
                    In FY 2000 EPA increased the number of states with direct access to
                    IDEA from 12 to 34 states by launching an Internet version of the Online
                    Targeting Information System for states at http://www.epa.gov/idea/otis.
                    [Note: Prior to FY 2000 states used the EPA mainframe or Windows
                    version of IDEA. IDEA is a comprehensive system that provides
                    multimedia information on the environmental performance of EPA
                    regulated facilities. States can obtain historical profiles of EPA
                    inspections, enforcement actions and associated penalties, and toxic
                    chemical releases.]

 Data Source:     Manual system. EPA tracks the dates documents are issued and uploaded to
                 the Internet and monitors usage of IDEA.

 Data Quality:     Data are manually verified. There are no limitations on the use of this data.
                                                                        No
                                                                      FY 1999
                                                                       APG
                                                    90%
                                                  21 states
  94%
34 states
                                                                                 3
                                                                                  r
                                                                                         FY 2000 GPRA Perfomance
                                                                                                              11-81

-------
             FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                                   FY 2000
                                                                                              Planned    Actual
                      FY1999
                      Actual
        FY 2000 APG 56:  Ensure that EPA's policies, programs and activities include public
                         meetings, address minority and low income community issues so that
                         no segment of the population suffers disproportionately from adverse
                         health or environmental effects, and that all people live in clean, healthy
                         and sustainable communities consistent with Executive Order 12898.

        (FY 1999)         Provide over 100 grants to assist communities with understanding and
                         address Environmental Justice (EJ) issues.

        Performance Measures
         1. Number of EPA-sponsored public meetings held where disproportionately disadvantaged
           communities participate.
         2. Number of grants awarded to low income, minority communities for addressing environmental
           problems.

        Explanation:      Goal met. EPA is working to address this broad goal in a variety of ways and
                         has established two surrogate indicators of progress:

                         1.  EJ related public meetings, which help guide the Agency's national EJ
                            program. In FY 2000 the number of meetings, which focused on issues
                            such as facility permitting in low income communities and the health
                            effects of populations living near multiple pollution  generating facilities,
                            exceeded the target.

                         2.  EJ grants to community-based organizations working to carry out projects
                            that increase citizen involvement in EJ issues. In FY 2000 the Agency
                            received fewer eligible grant applications than expected. As a result, EPA's EJ
                            Small Grants Program issued 62 grants totaling approximately $900,000.
                            [Note: approximately $135,000 came from EPA's Regional offices.]

                            Additional  information on  the  Agency's EJ activities, including meeting
                            summaries and grant applications, as well as activities associated with
                            the federal EJ interagency workgroup can be found at
                            http://www.epa.gov/oeca/ej.

        Data Source:      Manual system. Action items from public meetings and the number of EJ
                         grants are tracked internally. The grants are also entered into the Agency's
                         grant tracking system  for financial tracking purposes.

        Data Quality:      Data are manually verified. There are no limitations on the use of this data.
                        100
                      grants
25 mtgs.
70 grants
31 mtgs.
62 grants
                BY 2005, EPA WILL IMPROVE THE ABILITY OF THE PUBLIC TO REDUCE EXPOSURE TO SPECIFIC
          ENVIRONMENTAL AND HUMAN HEALTH RISKS BY MAKING CURRENT, ACCURATE SUBSTANCE-SPECIFIC
                                       INFORMATION WIDELY AND EASILY ACCESSIBLE.
        FY 2000 APG 57:  All community water systems (CWSs) will issue annual consumer
                         confidence reports according to the rule promulgated in August 1998.

        (FY 1999)         EPA will partner with the states in implementation activities that will ensure
                         all public water systems - large, medium, and especially small - are informed
                         of both the requirements of the consumer confidence report regulation and
                         implementation tools for complying with this rule.

        Performance Measures
         -  CWSs that will comply with the regulation to publish consumer confidence reports.
         -  Population served by CWSs that will comply with the regulation to publish consumer
           confidence reports.

        Explanation:      Goal met. The number of  CWSs is constantly changing due to consolidation
                         and other events that change the size of the regulated universe. By the fourth
                         quarter of FY 2000 the total number of CWSs in the United States  had
                         dropped to approximately 54,000, down from an estimated universe of
                         55,000 a few years earlier, which the Agency used to develop this measure.
 -55,000

  249
 million
 53,500

  252.8
 million
                     50 states
11-82
          EPA's FY2000 Annual Report

-------
     FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                               FY 2000
                                                                                          Planned    Actual
                     FY1999
                      Actual
                  Approximately 500 systems (<1% of the universe) did not issue consumer
                  confidence reports by the October 19, 1999 deadline. These are very small
                  systems, e.g., trailer parks. States and EPA are working with these systems
                  to provide technical assistance. The Agency has already followed up with a
                  number of actions to assure compliance and will continue to do so as
                  appropriate. Many of these systems have since provided the information and
                  EPA expects the remainder to comply with this regulation in FY 2001.

Data Source:      The Safe Drinking Water Information  System (SDWIS) serves as the central
                  repository for data on both the states' implementation of and compliance with
                  existing and new drinking water regulations. States and EPA regions (for
                  "direct implementation" jurisdictions) enter data representing public water
                  systems characteristics and drinking  water monitoring into the SDWIS
                  database.

Data Quality:      SDWIS has a full suite of software-based edit checks and quality assurance
                  procedures to aid accurate data entry. However, there are recurrent reports of
                  discrepancies between national and state databases, as well as specific
                  mis-identifications reported by individual utilities. Given the particular need for
                  confidence in the completeness and accuracy of data about drinking water
                  quality, EPA designated SDWIS content as an internal Agency weakness in
                  1999 under the Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act.
FY 2000 APG 58:   Process all submitted facility chemical release reports; publish annual
                  summary of Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data; provide improved
                  information to the public about TRI chemicals; and maximize public
                  access to TRI information.

(FY 1999)         Process 110,000 facility chemical release reports, publish the TRI Data
                  Release Report, and provide improved information to the public about TRI
                  chemicals,  enhancing community right-to-know and efficiency processing
                  information from industry.

Performance Measures
 1. TRI Public Data Release.
 2. Form R's Processed*.
 3. Toxics Release Inventor System (TRIS) database complete and report issued.

Explanation:      Goal  met.

                  1.  There is a 15 to 18 month data lag associated with the release of TRI
                     data due to  reporting cycles and data QA/QC. In FY 2000 EPA issued The
                     1998 TRI Public Data Release Report (May 11, 2000). TRI is a valuable
                     source of information regarding toxic chemicals that are being used,
                     manufactured, treated, transported, or released into the environment. The
                     most recent report included toxic release data from seven additional
                     industrial sectors. As a result of the inclusion of these seven new sectors,
                     together with the manufacturing industry, the total amount of toxic
                     emissions reported in the United States was 7.3 billion pounds. Additional
                     information on TRI can be found at http://www.epa.gov/tri.

                  2.  *The performance measure as stated above is inaccurate. Facilities are
                     required to report their annual TRI data (Form Rs or Form As) to EPA by
                     July of the following year. Form R, a detailed report of facility activity and
                     emissions, is used when a  facility has exceeded EPA established
                     threshold levels. Form A, a less detailed form, is used when  a facility
                     releases amounts of TRI chemicals that are below the established
                     threshold. The Agency processes all the reports it receives. This includes
                     Form Rs and Form As as well as revisions and the FY 1999  and FY 2000
                     results include Form Rs, Form As, and revisions. In FY 2000 the Agency
                     processed 119,000 chemical submissions and revisions, which  covered
                     the calendar year 1999 reporting period.

                  3.  The Agency uses the TRIS data management system to process and
                     store TRI data. Several peripheral modules are scheduled to be
                     completed in time to issue the 1999 TRI Report (2/2001).
                      117,171
   1
110,000
2/2001
    1
 119,000
On target
                                   &
                                   1
                                                                                                       GPRA Performance
                                                                                                                          11-83

-------
FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Data Source: Facility chemical release reports (Form Rs & Form As) submitted by the
regulated community are input into and stored in the TRIS data management
system.
Data Quality: The quality of the data contained in the TRI chemical reports is dependent
upon the quality of the data that the reporting facility uses to estimate its
releases and other waste management quantities. While the Agency does not
control the quality of the data submitted by the regulated community, the
Agency does work with the regulated community to improve the quality of
their estimates. EPA also provides verification that the information delivered
by the facilities is correctly entered into TRIS. Use of these data should be
based on the user's understanding that the Agency does not have direct
assurance of the accuracy of the facilities' measurement and reporting
processes.
FY 2000
Planned

Actual

FY 1999
Actual

                                           FY 1999 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS
                                            (NO LONGER REPORTED FOR FY 2000)
                Increase compliance with right-to-know reporting requirements by conducting 1,300 inspection and undertaking
                200 enforcement actions.

                By 1999, complete five to seven monitoring pilot projects in Environmental Monitoring for Public Access and Community
                Tracking (EMPACT) cities, implement timely and high quality environmental monitoring technology in five to seven
                EMPACT cities.
I
r^
•a
o
11-84
          EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
Goal 8 FY 2000 Obligations       ^rkiĄo  orkiixTTk crnmrr,   Ym/rnnsvirark
          $264M                GOAL 8: SOUND SCIENCE,  IMPROVED
                          UNDERSTANDING OF ENVIRONMENTAL RISK,
                             AND GREATER INNOVATION  TO ADDRESS
                                     ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS
                        EPA will develop and apply the best available science for addressing
                       current and future environmental hazards, as well as new approaches
Note: EPA FY2000 Obligations
     were $8,974 million
                                      toward improving environmental protection.
OVERVIEW

   Sound science allows EPA to identify the most
important sources of risk to human health and the
environment and therefore underpins the Agency's
priorities  and policies. It is critical that research  and
scientific  assessment be integrated with EPA's policy
and regulatory activities. As the Agency addresses
increasingly complex issues in the future, its research
programs will continue to provide the understanding
and technologies  needed to detect, abate, and avoid
public health and environmental problems. Under Goal
8 EPA conducts core  research to improve  our
understanding of the fundamental principles underlying
risk assessment and risk management. Additionally EPA
conducts  problem-driven research to  address specific
environmental risks associated with a number of the
other strategic goals, and descriptions  of this research
can be found in the discussion of these goals.
   Goal 8 also  highlights EPA's commitment to
innovative, continuous improvement in how the Agency
conducts its business and accomplishes its mission. This
commitment, for instance, encourages the use of expert
review and collaborative partnerships to ensure the
highest level of quality in the Agency's work. Building
on its scientific, economic, and regulatory research and
analysis activities,  EPA strives to make environmental
protection more flexible, efficient, and effective, while
minimizing the burden on the regulated community.

FY 2000 PERFORMANCE

Understanding Ecosystems
   EPA's ecosystems research program serves a key
integrative function by enhancing the  basic
                                                understanding of the processes that govern ecosystem
                                                function as well as the technology needed to model
                                                those processes. In FY 2000 EPA continued to conduct
                                                research to develop the scientific understanding needed
                                                to measure, model, maintain, and restore the integrity
                                                and sustainability of ecosystems now and in the future.
                                                The Agency focused on developing verified decision
                                                support tools and methods and technologies to improve
                                                or maintain ecosystem conditions at the watershed scale.
                                                Efforts included a methods manual for the collection
                                                of  biological, chemical, and physical habitat samples
                                                and a  report  on relationships between wetlands and
                                                land-use patterns and the quality of streams and biotic
                                                communities in watersheds of the Lake Superior Basin.
                                                   In 1989,  concurrent with the beginning  of the
                                                Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
                                                (EMAP), EPA began the Mid-Atlantic Integrated
                                                Assessment  (MAIA)   to  provide   integrated
                                                environmental assessment information as input into
                                                future  environmental policy decisions. Ten years of
                                                representative regional monitoring provided by EMAP
                                                have produced several interim assessment products that
                                                decision-makers are already using. These reports include
                                                An Ecological Assessment of the United States Mid-Atlantic
                                                Region: A Landscape Atlas (1998) and The Condition of the
                                                Mid-Atlantic Estuaries (1999). A report on the state of
                                                Mid-Atlantic region highland streams was produced in
                                                FY 2000. The next phase  of  MAIA is the Regional
                                                Vulnerability Assessment (ReVA), part of EPA's
                                                FY 2000 initiative for the National Science and
                                                Technology Council's cross-Agency Integrated Science
                                                for Ecosystem Challenges (ISEC). ReVA will assess and
                                                compare current and future (up to 25 years  hence)
                                                ecological vulnerabilities  in the region to improve
                                                targeting of restoration and risk reduction activities.
                                                (http://www.epa.gov/maia/html/reports.html).
                                                                           FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                             11-85

-------
°
        The Agency has also begun similar studies in the
    western United States and in coastal areas across the
    nation  using EMAP monitoring  and sampling
    procedures  developed for use in the Mid-Atlantic
    region. For example, the Western EMAP Study will test
    the approach used by MAIA on a larger scale in a region
    that contains ecosystems, such as arid zones, not found
    in the Mid- Atlantic region. FY 2000 also marked the
    first year  of the Coastal 2000 Initiative, a  national
    demonstration of the  EMAP monitoring design that
    will provide a comprehensive, statistically valid estimate
    of the health of the nation's estuaries.

    Understanding and Detecting Risks to the
    Environment and Human Health

        Advances in the state of environmental science have
    illustrated that new  risk assessment methods are needed
    to investigate complex environmental and human health
    issues across EPAs environmental protection programs.
    The unique  susceptibilities of infants  and children to
    exposure to toxic substances is an example of such issues.

        The Agency is coordinating efforts to develop new
    methods, models, and measures to address three major
    areas of scientific  uncertainty in  human health  risk
    assessment (1) measuring and  modeling human
    exposure,  (2) identifying or characterizing hazards and
    dose response, and (3) characterizing and assessing
    variation  in human exposure and susceptibility to
    disease. In FY 2000 EPA developed risk assessment
    guidance and regional  assessments for evaluating risks
    to children exposed to  environmental contaminants. In
    addition the Agency continued its support of the eight
    pediatric research centers established in 1998 and issued
    a solicitation for proposals to establish a ninth center
    to focus on non-asthma-related research issues,  such
    as developmental disorders.

        In recent years EPA has begun moving toward a
    more proactive approach for protecting human  and
    environmental health by anticipating  potential  risks
    before they become major concerns. FY 2000 research,
    for example, focused in part  on endocrine disrupters.
    Specifically FY 2000 research products included
    protocols  to screen pesticides and  chemicals found in
    food and drinking water sources for their potential to
    cause estrogenic and other endocrine effects. EPA will
    use these  methods to implement the  screening  and
    testing program requirements of  the Food Quality
    Protection Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act
Amendments of 1996. Further research identified
specific developmental and reproductive effects (and
the mechanisms behind them) caused by certain
endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Benefits of this work
and similar efforts will include an improved framework
for Agency  decision-making, increased ability to
anticipate and perhaps deter serious environmental risks,
and enhanced communication with the public and other
stakeholders.
    In addition to the developments in risk assessment
data, EPAs efforts over the past year produced further
improvements in the economic information  and
methods available for use in the Agency's analyses. In
FY 2000 the Agency continued to convene workshops
for its ongoing economic research and policy  series,
bringing economists together to explore  important
topics, such  as economic  assessments  of land use
policies, community-based environmental decision-
making, and methods applied by different government
agencies to characterize benefits from enhanced food
safety. EPA held additional workshops in collaboration
with the Science Advisory Board to better integrate the
methods and tools used to assess and manage human
health risks, with a focus on characterizing cancer health
effects. Also EPA and the National Science Foundation
supported a series  of new economic research
solicitations directed at such priorities as market-based
mechanisms  and economic incentives,  corporate
environmental performance and the effectiveness of
government intervention, and characterizing children's
health benefits.

Understanding How to Prevent Pollution

    Research under Goal  8  has  also  focused on
developing innovative pollution prevention strategies
and technologies. In FY 2000 EPA undertook research
to develop methods and decision tools that are more
quantitative and easier for stakeholders  and decision-
makers to use when considering pollution prevention
strategies, including computer-based tools for chemical
and industrial processes.  FY 2000 research also
accelerated the adoption and incorporation of pollution
prevention technologies by developing, testing,  and
demonstrating techniques applicable across economic
sectors. In FY 2000 56 innovative technologies were
verified through  EPAs Environmental Technology
Verification Program, which evaluates the performance
of pollution prevention technologies that are ready for
commercial application.
11-86
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
Testing Sector- and Facility-Based Innovations

    Another important program under Goal 8 is Project
XL, which stands for "eXcellence and Leadership."
Project XL is a national initiative that tests innovative
ways of achieving better and more cost-effective public
health and environmental protection. EPA is using the
information obtained and lessons learned from Project
XL in redesigning its current regulatory and policy-
setting approaches. EPA met its goal of 50  signed
project agreements by the end of October 2000. To
increase the opportunities for broader incorporation
of  innovative approaches  into  EPA programs, the
Agency is increasing its efforts to identify and develop
pilot projects targeted to specific programmatic needs.
For example, Project XL is running a series  of five
projects designed to  test alternative approaches for
streamlining the water pretreatment program. There are
also several projects to test the  value of bio-reactor
technology for solid waste landfills. The use  of this
technology could decrease  emissions  of landfill gas,
accelerate waste decomposition, enhance groundwater
protection, and increase the waste capacity of existing
landfills. More information on Project XL is available
on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/ProjectXL.

    Regarding  sector-based  innovations,  EPA
developed the Sector Program Plan 2000-2005, which has
been endorsed by external stakeholders and will
complete the integration of sector approaches into core
federal and state environmental programs. EPA showed
continuing progress in the Metal Finishing Strategic
Goals Program, through which over 400 facilities in 21
states have, to date, voluntarily reduced  sludge
shipments  to landfills by over 120 million pounds,
wastewater  discharges by  380 million gallons, and
organic chemical releases by 700,000 pounds. EPA also
developed new partnerships with four other industry
sectors participating in  the Sustainable  Industries
Program.

    In FY 2000 EPAs Regional Geographic Initiative
(RGI)  supported 137 projects, of which 58 were new
projects fostering partnerships in additional parts of
the country. All of  the projects support Agency
initiatives; contribute to at least one of the air, water,
waste, toxics, and enforcement environmental goals; and
support the overall  national EPA mandates. For
example, Region 4's Chattanooga Air Toxics Study
consolidated monitoring data to  develop  a risk
assessment contributing to  Goal 1  air  toxics
FY 2000 Distribution of Regional Geographic
   Initiative Projects Across Agency Goals
 Clean Water
  25.9%
                           Pollution Prevention
                               16.0%
                                  Better Waste Management
                                         7.4%
                                  Right-to-Know
                                     16.7%
Enforcement & Compliance
     Assurance
       3.1%      Science & Innovation
                    14.8%
 characterization work. In addition Region 8's Missouri
 River Benthic Fish Study finished field work and moved
 into data analysis, contributing to Goal 2 clean water
 efforts.
    Goal 8 efforts are also geared toward providing field
 sampling, analytical and data management support, and
 quality assurance to Agency programs nationwide. To
 ensure the highest quality scientific data is  being
 generated by the Regional Science and Technology
 (RS&T)  laboratories, the regions  participated in a
 laboratory assessment program, which included internal
 reviews and external audits. In addition RS&T "Centers
 of Applied  Science" (CAS) reflect state-of-the-art,
 nationally recognized expertise responding to Agency
 and stakeholder needs. In FY 2000 CAS developed
 methods  and standard operating procedures for dioxins
 and furans, polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) congeners,
 explosives, arsenic speciation, endocrine disrupters, and
 fish tissue extraction. EPA continues to partner with
 other federal, state, and local agencies to locate, assess,
 and share environmental data. These efforts build
 Agency capacity and assist partner agencies by providing
 technical and  analytical support and by converting
 environmental data of sound and credible quality into
 useful decision-making information.

 Improving the Production and Use of Science at
 EPA Through the Science Advisory Board
    EPAs Science Advisory Board (SAB)  provides
 independent peer review advice to  the Administrator
 and Congress  about the  scientific  underpinnings of
 Agency decisions to make a positive difference in the
                                                                                   FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                       11-87

-------
    production and use of science at EPA. In FY 2000 the
    SAB conducted reviews on key pollutants, including
    arsenic in drinking water and airborne particulate matter;
    risk assessment methodologies and methods, such as
    environmental technology verification; and policies,
    including the use of data from the testing of human
    subjects. The Board also held workshops to develop
    ways to merge the social sciences with the biological,
    chemical,  and physical sciences to inform Agency
    decisions. FY 2000 saw the  publication of Toward
    Integrated  Environmental  Decision-making.  The
    recommendations of  this  SAB  report  (http://
    www.epa.gov/sab/ecirp011.pdf) hold the promise of
    a future of environmental protection that  integrates
    science—and the scientific  community—into the
    broader social enterprise of decision making in newer,
    more productive, more efficient ways.

    SUMMARY OF FY 2000 PERFORMANCE

        In summary EPA made significant progress toward
    this strategic goal in FY 2000. The Agency continued
    to develop and apply the highest quality scientific
    methods and tools  as it sought solutions to this nation's
    most pressing public  health  and environmental
    problems. EPA also looked to identify those areas that
    may pose hazards in the future. In addition the Agency
    continued to address environmental and human health
    issues through the  use of new and innovative
    approaches that are not only  scientifically sound, but
    also effective, efficient, and flexible.

    STRENGTHENING PROGRAM INTEGRITY
    THROUGH IMPROVED MANAGEMENT

        In FY 2000 EPA continued its efforts to reinvent
    environmental regulation to achieve better results
    through the use of innovative and flexible approaches
    to environmental protection,  encourage states, tribes,
    communities, and  citizens to  share in environmental
    decision making, make it easier for businesses to comply
    with environmental laws,  and eliminate unnecessary
    paperwork. Lessons learned from Project XL pilots are
    being incorporated into permanent policy changes in
    EPAs programs and regional offices. The Agency also
S   launched the Performance Track Program during
<&
•3   FY 2000, which offers high performing companies a
<*>   new, more flexible  regulatory path. EPA will continue
66
"3   to involve stakeholders  from national and  local
environmental groups, industry, states, environmental
justice organizations, and other interested parties in the
design and implementation of these projects  and
activities.
    Please see Section III - Management Accomplishments
and'Challenges'for a further discussion of the above issues.

PROGRAM EVALUATION
    During the past year, EPA has actively participated
with the National Academy of Public Administration
in the Academy's evaluation of Agency  and state
reinvention  efforts. The Agency  reviewed  17
commissioned studies and the Academy's draft report.
The final report published in November 2000 made
sweeping recommendations to reinvigorate  the whole
environmental regulatory framework and specifically
addressed new approaches for such issues as watersheds,
emissions trading systems, adoption of environmental
management systems, innovative approaches to
permitting,  and  Superfund  reform   (http://
www.napawash.org/napa/index.html).

ASSESSMENT OF  IMPACTS OF FY 2000
PERFORMANCE ON FY 2001 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE PLAN

    Goal 8 Annual  Performance Goals (APGs) in
FY 2001 reflect generally successful performance in
FY 2000.
    Environmental research is long-term in nature, and
its outcomes are often difficult to predict. Research
outcomes do not necessarily occur on a regular basis,
but rather at sometimes unexpected points over the
lifetime of the work and beyond. A scientific  model
might yield benefits when it is used in the development
of an environmental  standard some time after work on
the model has ended. Therefore APGs related to EPA's
research programs represent those points in time when
Agency scientists and engineers hope their work will
produce noteworthy  accomplishments.
    In FY 2000 EPA launched a multiyear planning
initiative that charts these critical junctures. This effort
has the potential to dramatically streamline and improve
the flow of performance results into future research
planning. Under the  initiative, Agency scientists have
formed work groups to develop multiyear plans (MYPs)
11-88
        EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
for major research programs.  These MYPs remain
consistent with the Agency's Government Performance
and Results Act structure and identify long-term goals
for various research strategies. MYPs also present a set
of measurable steps that enable achievement of the
long-term goals. Although the MYPs cover a period of
at least 5 years, they are living documents that  are
updated annually. Multiyear planning will  allow EPA
decision makers to better understand the impact of
annual planning decisions on future research efforts
and resulting performance achievements.

TABLES OF RESULTS

    The  following  tables of  results  includes
performance results for the FY 2000 five Congressional
APGs that appear in Goal 8. In cases where the FY 2000
APG is associated with an  FY 1999 APG, the table
includes the FY 1999 APG below the FY 2000 APG
for ease in comparing performance. Additionally EPA
is providing information on FY 1999 APGs for which
data was not available when the FY 1999  report was
published as well as those FY 1999 APGs that are not
associated with any APGs in FY 2000.
                                                                                                        1
                                                                                 FY 2000 GPRA Performance    11-89

-------
                                              FY 2000 Annual Report
                          Annual Performance Goals and Measures - Table of Results
      I Summary FY 2000 Performance I
       ~~      ~~        fol
I A (Goals I -t  (Goals
1^ I Mot   I • jNotMet
GOAL 8 - SOUND SCIENCE, IMPROVED UNDERSTANDING
 OF ENVIRONMENTAL RISK, AND GREATER INNOVATION
        TO  ADDRESS ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS
               FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                      Planned    Actual
                                                                                                   Actual
          BY 2008, PROVIDETHE SCIENTIFIC UNDERSTANDING TO MEASURE, MODEL, MAINTAIN, OR RESTORE, AT
          MULTIPLE SCALESJHE INTEGRITY AND SUSTAINABILITY OF ECOSYSTEMS NOW AND IN THE FUTURE.
       2000 APG 59:     Report on monitoring findings in the Mid-Atlantic Region as a cost
                       effective means of measuring the condition of these systems.

       (FY 1999)        Complete and evaluate a multi-tiered ecological monitoring system for the
                       Mid-Atlantic Region and provide select land cover and aquatic indicators for
                       measuring status and trends (2001).

       Performance Measures
        -  A final report on the extent and magnitude of fish tissue contamination in small, wadeable
          streams in the Mid-Atlantic Region as means of identifying high risk areas.
        -  Final report on the relationship between macro-invertebrate and periphyton assemblages and
          chemical and physical stressors to verify the applicability of these biological indicators in the
          Mid-Atlantic  Region.

       Explanation:      Goal met. Reports were completed on monitoring findings regarding fish
                       tissue contamination and biological indicators in the Mid-Atlantic Region.
                       This research supports the long-term goal to design a more cost-effective
                       scientifically sound environmental report card on these ecosystems in the
                       future. The research also supports further development of ecological and
                       biological criteria, improved designs for monitoring surface water quality, new
                       indicators to assist in diagnosing degraded streams, rivers and estuaries,
                       and development of better methods for evaluating improvements.

       Data Source:      Agency generated material.

       Data Quality:      As required by the Agency-wide formal peer review policy issued in 1993,
                       and reaffirmed in 1994 and 1998, all major scientific and technical work
                       products used in Agency decision-making are independently peer  reviewed
                       before their use. EPA has implemented a rigorous process of peer review for
                       both its in-house and extramural research programs. Peer review panels
                       include scientists and engineers from academia, industry and other federal
                       agencies.
                                                                                                   Target
                                                                                                   year is
                                                                                                   FY 2001
              BY 2008, IMPROVE THE SCIENTIFIC BASIS TO IDENTIFY, CHARACTERIZE, ASSESS, AND MANAGE
         ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURES THAT POSE THE GREATEST HEALTH RISKS TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC BY
          DEVELOPING MODELS AND METHODOLOGIES TO INTEGRATE INFORMATION ABOUT EXPOSURES AND
                                         EFFECTS FROM MULTIPLE PATHWAYS.
       FY 2000 APG 60:  Develop risk assessment guidance and regional assessments
                       concerning risks to children exposed to environmental contaminants.

       Performance Measures
        -  Assess pesticide exposures to children in Washington, Minnesota, and Arizona.
        -  Report on the use of mechanistic data in developmental toxicity risk.
        -  Develop exposure factors handbook for children.

       Explanation:      Goal not met. Two of the three critical performance measures supporting this
                       annual performance goal were completed on schedule. The Exposure
                       Factors Handbook was not completed due to the extension of the public
                       comment period. The final handbook will be released in FY 2001. Reports on
                       the use of mechanistic data in developmental toxicity risk assessment and
                       assessments of pesticide exposures to children in Washington, Minnesota,
                       and Arizona, were published in FY 2000.
                                                                                                    No
                                                                                                  FY1999
                                                                                                   APG
11-90
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Data Source: Same as FY 2000 APG 59.
Data Quality: Same as FY 2000 APG 59.
FY 2000
Planned


Actual


FY 1999
Actual


BY 2008, ESTABLISH CAPABILITY AND MECHANISMS WITHIN EPA TO ANTICIPATE AND IDENTIFY
ENVIRONMENTAL OR OTHER CHANGES THAT MAY PORTEND FUTURE RISK, INTEGRATE FUTURES PLANNING
INTO ONGOING PROGRAMS, AND PROMOTE COORDINATED PREPARATION FOR AND RESPONSETO CHANGE.
FY 2000 APG 61 : Develop tools to identify hazards and formulate strategies to manage
risks from exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) capable
of inducing adverse effects in humans and wildlife.
(FY 1999) Initiate field exposure study of children to two endocrine disrupting
chemicals.
Performance Measures
- Workshop report on Endocrine Disrupter Screening and Testing Advisory Committee
(EDSTAC) screening process for EDCs and application of the EDSTAC testing program for
chemical hazard and risk assessment.
- Characterization of environmental agents as risk factors in human prostate cancer.
- Reports on endocrine and other effects in exposed women and their offspring in a
contaminated cohort.
- Reports on the molecular mechanisms underlying estrogen receptor functions in mice.
- Development and refinement of test methods for use in Tier 1 testing of potential EDCs.
- Development of amphibian assay for use in hazard identification.
Explanation: Goal met. Tools were developed to help identify hazards and formulate
strategies to manage risks from exposure to EDCs. The finding of one report
indicated that daughters of mothers exposed to poly-brominated biphenols
(PBBs) begin menarche earlier than daughters of unexposed mothers.
Methods were developed and refined for use in Tier 1 testing of potential
EDCs. Reports were published on the molecular mechanisms underlying
estrogen receptor (ER) functions in ER knockout mice and on the
development of an amphibian assay used in hazard identification. A position
paper that helped determine the application of the EDSTAC testing program
for chemical hazard and risk assessment was published. Work characterizing
environmental agents as risk factors in human prostate cancer was delayed,
but this delay did not prevent substantive achievement of this goal.
Data Source: Same as FY 2000 APG 59.
Data Quality: Same as FY 2000 APG 59.



1
1
2
2
2
1






1
0
2
2
2
1




Target
year is
FY 2008










BY 2006, DEVELOP AND VERIFY IMPROVED TOOLS, METHODOLOGIES, AND TECHNOLOGIES FOR MODELING,
MEASURING, CHARACTERIZING, PREVENTING, CONTROLLING, AND CLEANING UP CONTAMINANTS
ASSOCIATED WITH HIGH PRIORITY HUMAN HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS.
FY 2000 APG 62: Complete development of one or more computer-based tools which
simulate product, process, or system design changes, and complete
proof-of-process structure for one or more generic technologies
(applicable to more than one environmental problem) to prevent or
reduce pollution in chemicals and industrial processes.
Performance Measures
- Complete development of PARIS II Software tool to design environmentally benign solvents,
and development and integration of Waste Reduction (WAR) Algorithm into commercially
available chemical process simulator.
- Complete Beta testing of a decision support tool for life-cycle analyses of municipal waste
management options.


9/30/00
9/30/00


9/30/00
9/30/00
No
FY 1999
APG



                               1
FY 2000 GPRA Perfomance
                           11-91

-------
•a
o
FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Explanation: Goal met. EPA completed the development of two software programs: the
PARIS II Software, a tool to design environmentally benign solvents; and the
WAR Algorithm, version 1.0, a commercially available chemical process
simulator. Furthermore, the beta testing of a decision support tool used in
life-cycle analysis for municipal solid waste management options was
completed.
Data Source: Same as FY 2000 APG 59.
Data Quality: Same as FY 2000 APG 59.
FY 2000
Planned

Actual

FY1999
Actual

BY 2005, EPA WILL INCREASETHE NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR AND APPLICATIONS OF
SECTOR-BASED APPROACHES TO ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT BY 150% OVER 1996 LEVELS.
FY 2000 APG 63: All 50 Project XL projects will be in implementation.
(FY 1999) 50 Project excellence and Leadership (XL) Projects will be in development or
implementation, an increase of 23 projects over 1998.
Explanation: Goal met. There are 50 XL projects in place and entering the implementation
phase.
Data Source: Manual system.
Data Quality: Data are manually verified.
50
50
24
                                         FY 1999 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS
               (ACTUAL PERFORMANCE DATA AVAILABLE IN FY 2000 AND BEYOND OR WITH PERFORMANCE
              	TARGETS BEYOND FY 2000)	
                                                                                                    Planned
            Actual
       FY 1999 APG:    Develop and verify innovative methods and models for assessing the
                       susceptibilities of population to environmental agents, aimed at enhancing
                       risk assessment and management strategies and guidelines.

       Explanation:     In FY 2000 work continued to quantify the exposure of children to environmental
                       agents such as organophosphates, trazines, and pyrethroids.

       Data Source:     Same as FY 2000 APG 59.

       Data Quality:     Same as FY 2000 APG 59.
Target year
is FY 2008
                                         FY 1999 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS
                                           (NO LONGER REPORTED FOR FY 2000)
                Analyze existing monitoring data for acid deposition and Ultraviolet-B (UVB) and implement a multiple site UVB
                monitoring system for measuring status and trends.

                Provide ecological risk assessment case studies for two watersheds, final guidelines for reporting ecological risk
                assessment, and ecological risk assessment guidance and support.

                Produce first generation exposure models describing residential exposure to pesticides.

                Improve Computational Efficiency of Fine Particulate Model by 25%.
11-92
          EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
   Goal 9 FY 2000 Obligations
              $371M
                           GOAL 9: A CREDIBLE DETERRENT TO POLLUTION
                               AND GREATER COMPLIANCE WITH THE  LAW
                                   EPA will ensure full compliance with laws intended to
                                        protect human health and the environment.
   Note: EPA FY2000 Obligations
       were $8,974 million
OVERVIEW

    Protecting the public and the environment from
risks posed by violations of environmental requirements
is basic to EPA's mission. By using tools such as
assistance designed to prevent violations, incentives to
motivate compliance, and enforcement actions to
correct violations and  deter others, EPA obtains
continuous improvement in compliance with standards,
permits, and other requirements. As a result human
health is protected, environmental risks are mitigated,
and regulated facilities do a better job of environmental
management.
    In  partnership with  the states and  federally
recognized tribes, EPA's enforcement and compliance
assurance program regulates approximately 8 million
entities that range from community drinking water
systems to pesticide users to major industrial facilities.
Compliance data are maintained for approximately 1.7
million of  these entities.  These include municipal
sewage treatment plants,  large manufacturing  and
industrial operations, and hazardous waste treatment
and storage facilities. The remaining 6.5 million entities
range from small business facilities to individual
property owners. The variety of regulatory requirements
under the various environmental statutes and the large
and diverse universe of regulated entities require  that
EPA use many different tools and strategies to maximize
compliance.

    EPA addresses compliance problems through a
comprehensive, strategic compliance assurance
approach. This approach includes a strong program of
compliance monitoring, civil and criminal enforcement,
compliance incentives and compliance assistance.  The
Agency's experience has  shown that using these tools
in a strategic, targeted way addresses noncompliance
most effectively. A strong enforcement effort provides
the foundation for the national compliance program,
motivates regulated entities to seek assistance and use
incentive policies, and provides fairness  in the
marketplace by ensuring that noncomplying facilities
do not gain an unfair competitive advantage.
    As a result of the delegation authority provided
for by most statutes, state, tribal, and local governments
bear much  of the responsibility for ensuring the
compliance  of regulated  facilities and other entities.
Nationally,  states conduct a large majority of all
federally-related inspections and formal enforcement
actions, and provide most of the data retained in EPA's
enforcement and compliance data systems.

FY 2000 PERFORMANCE

    FY 2000 was a successful year in achieving
compliance. The national enforcement and compliance
program met or exceeded 80 percent of its  annual
performance goals. As a result EPA made great strides
toward meeting its mission of protecting human health
and safeguarding the natural environment.

Enforcing the Law, Achieving Results
    Enforcement actions brought by EPA against a
noncomplying facility often result in a reduction in the
amount of pollutants the  facility discharges to the air,
water,  or land. EPA's FY 2000 enforcement actions
required reduction or prevention of emissions or
discharges  of an estimated 714 million pounds1 of
pollutants and required the treatment of an additional
1.3 billion pounds of contaminated soils, sediments, or
water.  Concluded enforcement actions also require
changes in facility practices  that bring environmental
I
PP
1The level of pollutants reduced includes 334 million pounds from FY 2000 civil
 enforcement actions and 380 million pounds (190,000 tons of nitrogen oxide (NOJ and
 sulfur dioxide (SO,)) from the first year of the Tampa Electnc Company (TECO) settlement.
                                                                                 FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                     11-93

-------
8
§
              KEY ENFORCEMENT OUTCOMES
      Enforcement cases concluded in FY 2000 produced
      the following results:
       • 2 billion pounds of pollutants were reduced or
         treated.
       • 75 percent of enforcement actions required various
         improvements in environmental management.
       • Violators spent $2.6 billion to return to compliance.
       •Violators  spent  $66.8  million  on  other
         environmentally beneficial projects as part of case
         settlements.
improvements. In FY 2000 approximately 14 percent
of  concluded  enforcement  actions  required
improvements in the use or handling of pollutants, such
as changes in industrial processes or storage and disposal
practices to achieve emission and discharge reductions.
Approximately   another  61  percent  required
improvements in facility environmental management
practices, including testing, training, labeling, and overall
improvements to  environmental management systems.
In FY 2000 polluters were required to spend more than
$2.62 billion to correct violations, known as "injunctive
relief," and take additional steps  to  protect the
environment. Settlement of enforcement cases  also
produces supplemental environmental projects (SEPs) in
which  violators perform additional environmentally
beneficial projects  in exchange for a penalty reduction. In
FY 2000 SEPs totaled $66.83 million, with Clean Air Act
(CAA)  settlements accounting for 60 percent of the total.

    The Agency  uses  compliance inspections,
investigations and other assessments to determine the
compliance  status of regulated facilities. In FY 2000
EPA conducted 20,123 inspections and 660 intensive
civil compliance investigations. These inspections and
investigations resulted in the identification of a number
of serious environmental violations, including,  but not
limited to, pollutant releases not allowed by  permit,
illegal storage of hazardous waste, and discharge of oil
in harmful quantities. Where necessary EPA addresses
noncompliance with an enforcement action appropriate
to the violation. In FY 2000 EPA  took a total of
    2The money spent by polluters to correct violations includes $1.6 billion from FY 2000
     cases and $1 billion from the TECO settlement.
•a
o
3 The money spent by polluters on SEPs includes $55.8 million from FY 2000 enforcement
cases and $11 million from the TECO settlement.
5,791 civil judicial and administrative enforcement
actions, the highest number taken in the past 10 years.

    In FY 2000 EPA took many enforcement actions
that addressed high  risk violations of regulations
designed to protect human health and the environment
and that led to environmental improvements. A few
examples follow:

•   As the result of a settlement agreement between
    EPA and  Willamette Industries, the  release of
    approximately 27,000  tons of pollutants to the air
    will be prevented  per  year. The agreement covers
    13 facilities in four states for violations of CAA
    provisions designed to ensure that air quality does
    not deteriorate in areas that have previously been
    deemed to have clean air. The company will pay
    the largest CAA  civil penalty ever assessed for
    factory emissions of air pollution—$11.2 million—
    which will be  shared with EPA and the three states
    (Arkansas, Louisiana and South Carolina) joining
    EPA in the action.

•   Koch Industries, a petroleum refining firm, agreed
    to pay a record fine of $30 million to improve its
    leak-prevention programs and spend $5 million on
    environmental projects for very serious violations
    of the Clean Water Act (CWA) stemming from oil
    spills in six states. Most of the spills were caused
    by the corrosion of pipelines in rural areas resulting
    in an estimated three  million gallons of crude oil
    and other products leaking into ponds, lakes, rivers,
    streams, and shorelines.

•   In November 1999 EPA filed lawsuits against seven
    of the nation's largest power generating companies.
    The filings resulted from one of the Agency's largest
    investigations  targeted  at reducing the emissions of
    nitrogen oxide (NOJ and sulfur dioxide (SO^ to the
    air and enforcing the requirements of the CAA. The
    lawsuits filed alleged that the seven companies' 32 coal-
    fired power plants had been upgraded without adding
    the needed air pollution controls and that the power
    plants illegally released massive amounts of air
    pollutants contributing to  some of the most severe
    environmental problems facing the nation today. The
    first case settled after the November filings was with
    the Tampa Electric Company (TECO). Based on the
    settlement, emissions of NOx and SO2 will be reduced
    by a combined 190,000 tons annually. The TECO
    settlement will result in the company installing "best
    available control technology" at all ten coal-fired power
11-94
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
    plant units at a cost estimated to be approximately
    $1 billion, along with additional injunctive relief of
    approximately $10 million and a civil penalty of $3.5
    million.

    EPA's criminal  enforcement program addresses
violations that are the result of deliberate or negligent
actions.  In  FY 2000,  477   in-depth criminal
investigations were  targeted at  the most serious and
dangerous violators of environmental laws, resulting
in 236 cases referred to the Department of Justice for
criminal prosecution.  Moreover, in criminal  cases
concluded in FY 2000, violators received 146 total years
of jail time. One of the most  serious criminal cases
involved an Idaho man who received the heaviest federal
environmental  sentence  ever  given for knowingly
exposing employees to cyanide-17 years for four federal
violations. One employee in his twenties was left with
permanent  brain damage  from exposure to deadly
cyanide  gas.  In addition to jail time, the defendant was
ordered to immediately pay the victim approximately
$6 million in restitution and  pay EPA  more than
$300,000 for cleanup costs.

    In FY 2000  EPA put into place  several outcome
measures that  allow  the Agency to evaluate the
compliance behavior of the regulated community. For
example, to assess the Agency's effectiveness  in
deterring recurrence of significant noncompliance
problems, EPA is now establishing a baseline for the
percentage  of significant violators  with recurring
significant violations within 2 years of returning to
compliance. The percentage of facilities with recurring
significant violations of the CAA is 20.9 percent; for
the  CWA 53.5 percent;  and  for  the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 18.1 percent.
EPA is now also measuring the time taken by significant
violators to return to compliance or begin implementing
enforceable  agreements: 1.16 years for CWA and 0.97
years for RCRA. (Final data are not yet available for
the CAA.) EPA uses this information to determine how
the regulated community responds to being found in
significant noncompliance with the law;  (Significant
noncompliance  is carefully defined for each media
program based primarily  on criteria of severity and
duration.) A pilot project to establish statistically valid
noncompliance rates for selected regulated populations
was  undertaken in  FY 2000 and is continuing in
FY 2001. This effort is  verifying the compliance  status
of selected industries  and providing a baseline  for
performance measurement in future years. EPA will
build on these results to measure changes in behavior
as a result of targeted enforcement and compliance
assurance activities.

Increasing Compliance Through Incentives
and Assistance
    EPA promotes the compliance of the regulated
community through a program of incentives and
assistance. The Agency has two significant incentives
policies that are designed to address different groups
of the regulated community—the Audit/Self-Policing
Policy  and the Small Business  Policy. These  policies
provide incentives for regulated facilities  to detect,
disclose, and correct environmental violations and they
produce excellent results. These results are reflected in
 r                                           ^>
           AUDIT INITIATIVE IMPROVES
          COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW
  Since 1988 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) provisions
  of the Emergency Planning and Community  Right-
  To-Know Act (EPCRA) Section 313 has required the
  reporting of nitric acid treatment and "coincidental
  manufacture" of nitrates. EPA was concerned  that
  nitrate discharges were not being reported by certain
  industries, even though the Agency disseminated
  instructions  and guidance about  nitrate reporting
  under TRI. Such discharges can adversely affect local
  water quality and drinking water sources.
  EPA focused on six industry sectors in which under-
  reporting was suspected, first offering companies the
  opportunity to disclose and correct violations under
  the Audit Policy or the Small Business Policy. Sixty
  days later EPA sent letters to 600 companies that did
  not utilize the audit policies, offering the opportunity
  to provide the nitrate  reports for a reduced penalty.
  EPA also offered the option of additional penalty
  reduction for those facilities that  would conduct a
  facility audit for other EPCRA reporting violations.
  More than 130 companies reported using the audit
  or small business policies,  350 companies agreed to
  report and pay a reduced penalty, and more than 1,000
  facilities will report and audit for EPCRA compliance.
  Participants in the initiative have filed over 5,000 TRI
  reports totaling more than  50 million pounds of
  nitrate compounds as a result of this and other EPA
  initiatives. Communities will now have access to more
  information on the discharges of nitrates and other
i substances from local  plants.
V	    	S
I
                                                                                    FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                         11-95

-------
3
§
    the FY 2000 self-disclosures^-30 companies reported
    violations at 2,200 facilities.

        The Small Business Compliance Policy provides
    penalty waivers to small businesses that, following the
    policy's criteria, voluntarily discover, disclose, and
    correct a violation. FY 2000 modifications to the policy
    expanded the situations in which a business could use
    this tool to include any voluntarily discovered violations,
    not merely violations discovered as a result of on-site
    compliance assistance or audits. The updated policy also
    extends the disclosure period from ten  to 21 days,
    allowing small businesses  more time to consider the
    policy,  resolve  any questions,  and prepare  their
    disclosure letters.
        EPA has developed  a wide range of tools and
    services  that improve understanding of regulatory
    requirements and provide  compliance  assistance. The
    Agency reached  455,581 entities in FY 2000 through
    various  activities: on-site visits, hotlines,  workshops,
    training, and distribution of compliance assistance tools.
    These tools included sector guides, fact  sheets, and
    compliance  checklists.  EPA  targets compliance
    assistance activities to regulated facilities,  states, trade
    associations, compliance assistance  providers, the
    public,  universities,  and nonprofit  organizations.
    Recipients may  access Agency  information through
    different pathways, including the Internet.

          Growing Public Use of Compliance
                   Assistance Centers
     40000 r
     35000
      5000
        In FY 2000 EPA continued to support the ten
    Internet-based Compliance Assistance Centers created
    to help small and medium-sized businesses, local
    governments, and federal facilities understand and
    comply with their regulatory obligations. In FY 2000
target audiences and the public visited the Centers more
than 400,000 times, an increase of 56 percent from
FY 1999. These visits included over one million requests
for web pages and targeted compliance documents.

    EPA regions conducted ten projects for which they
measured outcomes of compliance assistance activities.
The projects involved  a combination of workshops,
on-site assistance,  and written assistance. EPA surveyed
project participants and learned that on average, 77
percent of responding recipients indicated an increased
understanding and awareness of regulations as a result
of the assistance  provided. Also, 64 percent of the
responding recipients indicated that they had taken at
least one action to comply with the environmental
regulations  as a result of the assistance received.

    EPA also provides  support to regulatory partners
through development of user-friendly guides, reference
materials, assisted  inspections, and training. To enhance
the expertise of state and tribal inspectors, EPA
conducted  713 assisted inspections.  In  addition the
Agency conducted 154  training classes or seminars for
states,  localities, and tribes to improve their ability to
identify and reduce noncompliance. EPA also provided
34 states with direct access to the user-friendly On-line
Targeting and Information System, exceeding its target
of 21 states. This system provides states with enhanced
information about noncompliance patterns.

SUMMARY OF FY 2000 PERFORMANCE

    EPAs FY 2000 performance in the  enforcement
and compliance program reflects strong progress in
achieving the goal of a  credible deterrent to pollution.
The program relies on traditional measures coupled with
new outcome-oriented  measures to evaluate progress
and document results. In FY 2000 the program achieved
high levels of performance in inspections  and
enforcement  actions,  as  well as record levels for
delivering  compliance assistance, promoting self-
disclosures, and delivering compliance  tools.  These
activities all contributed to EPA greatly exceeding the
target for  real environmental results: pounds of
pollutants reduced. EPA  also established several key
baselines for the program from which to evaluate the
future  environmental results of  actions taken. The
enforcement and compliance program is maintaining a
strong foundation and  integrating innovative
approaches  to ensure full compliance with laws intended
to protect human health and the environment.
11-96
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
STRENGTHENING PROGRAM INTEGRITY
THROUGH IMPROVED MANAGEMENT

    As a result of concerns about data quality and the
age and usefulness of EPA enforcement and compliance
data systems, the Agency initiated a process to modernize
data systems that would result in the integration of
enforcement and compliance information from various
media. This effort has been carefully coordinated with
EPAs broader effort to address data integration and
modernization across the Agency.
    A particular  area of focus for  EPA is  the  CWA
Permit Compliance System (PCS). EPA has worked with
the states to identify problems and define the revisions
needed to PCS that are  critical to effective National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination  System  (NPDES)
program management and oversight.  In partnership
with the states, EPA is reengineering PCS to better
address current requirements of the NPDES permitting
and enforcement programs and to meet the demands
of new initiatives such as tracking  reduced pollutant
loadings, capturing information on storm water sources,
and assessing the health of individual watersheds.
    Please see Section III -ManagementAccomplishments and
Challenges for a further discussion of the above issues.

PROGRAM EVALUATION

    In response to a request from Congress, in March
2000 the General Accounting Office (GAO)  issued the
report Pesticides: Improvements Needed to insure the Safety of
Farmworkers and their Children (RCED-OO^I-0) (http://
www.gao.gov) on issues related to the safety of children
who may be exposed to pesticides in agricultural settings.
The report recommended (1)  improving data on acute
pesticide illnesses, (2) taking steps to protect children
younger than 12 years old that work in agriculture  or are
otherwise present in pesticide-treated fields, (3) completing
the documentation on the adequacy of EPAs Worker
Protection Standard entry intervals for children 12 years
old or younger that work  in agriculture, and (4)
strengthening  EPA's oversight  of  the  states'
implementation and enforcement of the Standard. The
Agency initiated a review of national, regional, and state
enforcement of the Standard.  Using  a newly  developed
Standard protocol, EPA is currently engaged in regional
and state reviews to assess whether changes are needed to
the implementation and oversight of the Standard to
protect the health of farmworkers and their children.
ASSESSMENT OF FY 2000 IMPACTS ON THE
FY 2001 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN

    Performance in FY 2000 largely met or exceeded
expectations. In a few areas EPA has adjusted performance
targets for FY 2001. For example, the target for the amount
of pollutant reduction from concluded enforcement
actions has been significantly increased, as has the number
of inspections. Additionally in FY 2000, the Agency found
it more difficult than anticipated to arrive  at an accurate
first-time count of results for several new measures.
Examples are the percent of inspections and investigations
(civil and criminal) conducted at priority  areas and the
number of EPA-assisted inspections to build enforcement
capacity for states and tribes. EPA is considering ways to
improve the measurement of these activities.

    The Agency is continuing to improve annual
performance goals (APGs) and performance measures
for Goal 9, reflecting more experience  in measuring
enforcement  and compliance assurance  activities. In
FY 2000 the program successfully established baselines
for the following: timelines  for return to compliance
by significant violators; percent of significant violators
with recurrent significant violations;  and statistically
valid compliance rates on permit exceedances based
on self-reported information  from the regulated
community. EPA is using this information for  new
performance measures for FY 2001.
    In addition to these  new outcome-oriented
performance measures, the  Agency has also  added
measures in FY 2001 for the number of concluded
enforcement actions that result in improvements in facility
management and information practices, as well as training
to build enforcement capacity for tribal and state personnel.
Also EPA refined its measures for voluntary self-disclosure
and violation correction, and for the handling of hazardous
waste import and export notices.

TABLES OF RESULTS

    The  following tables  of results  includes
performance  results for the five FY 2000 APGs that
appear in Goal 9. In cases where the FY 2000 APG is
associated with  an FY 1999 APG, the table includes
the FY 1999 APG below the FY 2000 APG for ease in
comparing performance. Additionally EPA is providing
information on FY 1999 APGs that are not associated
with any APGs in FY 2000.
I
                             FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                11-97

-------
                                                  FY 2000 Annual Report
                            Annual Performance Goals and Measures - Table of Results
      I Summary FY 2000 Performance I
        ~~      ~~        fol
I A I Goals I -\ I Goals
1^ I Mot   I  ' jNotMet
GOAL 9 - A CREDIBLE DETERRENT TO POLLUTION
    AND GREATER COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW
                FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                            Planned    Actual
                                                                                                          Actual
            IDENTIFY AND REDUCE SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPLIANCE IN HIGH PRIORITY PROGRAM AREAS, WHILE
                MAINTAINING A STRONG ENFORCEMENT PRESENCE IN ALL REGULATORY PROGRAM AREAS.
        FY 2000 APG 64:  Deter and reduce noncompliance and achieve environmental and
                         human health improvements by maintaining a strong, timely and active
                         enforcement presence. EPA will direct enforcement actions to maximize
                         compliance and address environmental and human health problems;
                         75% of concluded enforcement actions will require environmental or
                         human health improvements such as pollution reduction, etc.

        (FY 1999)         Deter noncompliance by maintaining levels of field presence and
                         enforcement actions, particularly in high risk areas and/or where populations
                         are disproportionately exposed. In 1999, EPA will conduct 15,000 inspections
                         and undertake 2,600 enforcement actions.

        Performance Measures
         -  Estimated pounds of pollutants reduced (aggregate).
         -  Percent of actions which require pollutant reductions.
         -  Establish statistically valid noncompliance rates or other indicators for selected environmental
           problems.
         -  Establish a baseline to measure percentage of significant violators with reoccurring significant
           violations within two years of returning to compliance.
         -  Establish a baseline to measure average length of time for significant violators to return to
           compliance or enter enforceable plans/agreements.
         -  Produce report on the number of civil and criminal enforcement actions initiated and
           concluded.

        Explanation:      Goal met with 75% of concluded enforcement actions requiring environmental
                         and human health improvements. Approximately 14% of concluded
                         enforcement actions required improvements in the use  or handling of
                         pollutants, such as changes in industrial processes or storage and disposal
                         practices to achieve emission and discharge reductions. Approximately
                         another 61% required improvements in facility environmental management
                         practices, including, testing, training, labeling, and overall improvements to
                         environmental management systems. In managing for environmental results,
                         EPA significantly exceeded the target of pounds of pollutants reduced and
                         treated as a result of enforcement actions. This large increase over the target
                         was due to the settlement of the Tampa Electric Company (TECO) case. In
                         setting the FY 2000 target, resolution of the TECO case was not anticipated. In
                         addition, EPA required treatment of 1.3 billion pounds of contaminated soils,
                         sediments and water. The Agency will report several new performance
                         measures in FY 2001 on the outcomes resulting from concluded enforcement
                         actions. The percentage of overall actions that required pollutant reductions fell
                         below the target. This is partly because, in fulfilling a new regulatory
                         requirement, drinking water utilities were required to provide consumer
                         confidence reports (CCR) on the quality of their drinking water. Until most
                         states assume delegation for this program in FY 2001,  EPA had made this an
                         enforcement priority. (In FY 1999 there were 313 settlements; this grew to
                         2,134 settlements in FY 2000.) As these enforcement actions result in CCR
                         publication rather than direct pollutant reduction, the percentage of actions that
                         required pollutant reductions fell below the target. EPA is considering revising
                         downward the target for this measure in FY 2001.

        Data Source:      Regional offices calculate the results of enforcement actions and enter the
                         information in the DOCKET system. DOCKET tracks EPA civil, judicial and
                         administrative enforcement actions. The Permit Compliance System (PCS)
                         tracks permit and enforcement actions on effluent discharges. The Air Facility
                                                                                      300 M
                                                                                        35
                                                                                        5

                                                                                        1

                                                                                        1

                                                                                        1
                                                              714 M
                                                               13.6
                                                                5

                                                                1

                                                                1

                                                                1
                                                                                                          21,410
                                                                                                           3,935
11-98
          EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Sources System (AFS) captures emission compliance and permit data for
major stationary sources and air pollution. The Resource Conservation and
Recovery Information System (RCRAInfo) is a national database that
supports the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program and
contains information on entities that are engaged in hazardous waste
generation and management activities regulated under the hazardous waste
part of RCRA.
Data Quality: EPA manages 14 national data systems containing enforcement and
compliance data. The Agency has concerns about the quality and
completeness of data, ability of existing systems to meet data needs, and
incompatible database structures/designs. EPA has begun to address data
quality, is committed to data integration and modernization efforts, and believes
promoting greater public access to data will result in improved data quality. As
part of agreement between the headquarters and regional offices, the Agency
is placing greater emphasis on strengthening the quality of this data.
In FY 2000 the Agency continued to modernize its data systems and
completed the concept and requirements phase for the new Integrated
Compliance Information System (ICIS). ICIS will be an integrated
enforcement and compliance data management system that will support core
information needs. ICIS will track facility inspections, violations and
enforcement actions, as well as address more complex needs for compliance
assistance tracking, multimedia planning, targeting and evaluations. As EPA
migrates data into ICIS, the data will undergo quality control.
FY 2000 APG 65: Ensure compliance with legal requirements by assuring that hazardous
waste exports from the U.S. are properly handled. Implement U.S.
international commitments, and gain enforcement and compliance
cooperation with other countries, especially along U.S. borders (Mexico/
Canada).
Performance Measures
- Ensure compliance with legal requirements by assuring that hazardous waste exports from the
United States are properly handled (number of import and export notices filed and reviewed).
Explanation: Goal met. EPA met the goal of ensuring compliance with legal requirements
for hazardous waste exports by reviewing and responding to all submitted
waste import/export notifications. EPA is revising this annual goal and
performance measure in FY 2001 to reflect better the EPA review and
response to the notices for transboundary movement of hazardous wastes.
Data Source: The Hazardous Waste Export System maintains manual reports submitted by
United States exporters. The Waste Import Tracking System maintains
manual reports submitted by foreign governments.
Data Quality: Hazardous waste import/export notifications are self-reported and, thus, are
subject to bias. EPA works with the U.S. Customs Service to ensure the
quality of data and compliance by exporters/importers with legal
requirements.
FY 2000 APG 66: EPA will conduct 13,500 inspections, 500 criminal investigations, and
150 civil investigations, 50% of which are targeted at priority areas.
(FY 1999) Deter noncompliance by maintaining levels of field presence and
enforcement actions, particularly in high risk areas and/or where populations
are disproportionately exposed. In 1999, EPA will conduct 15,000 inspections
and undertake 2,600 enforcement actions.
Performance Measures
- Number of EPA inspections.
- Number of civil investigations.
- Number of criminal investigations.
- Percent of inspections and investigations (civil and criminal) conducted at priority areas.
FY 2000
Planned

1,500
13,500
150
500
50
Actual

1,584
20,123
660
477
15
FY 1999
Actual

No
FY 1999
APG
21,410
3,935
                               I
FY 2000 GPRA Perfomance
                           11-99

-------
             FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                                       FY 2000
                                                                                                 Planned    Actual
                    FY 1999
                    Actual
        Explanation:      Goal not met. Actual inspections surpassed targets and this target increases
                         for FY 2001. The Agency exceeded the target for civil investigations because
                         of investigations in the new media enforcement areas of the Oil Pollution Act
                         and the Emergency Planning and  Community Right to Know Act. EPA fell
                         short of the target for criminal investigations due to an Agency hiring freeze.
                         EPA is revising downward the target for this measure in FY 2001. For the
                         major media programs, the percentages of inspections in  high priority areas
                         were: Clean Air Act-38%; Clean Water Act-34%; and RCRA-35%. The
                         annual goal and measure for the percentage of inspections and
                         investigations conducted at priority areas proved difficult to define and
                         calculate, and is not a measure in  FY 2001.

        Data Source:      The Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA) System integrates data
                         from major enforcement and compliance systems (e.g., PCS, AFS,
                         RCRAInfo), including  data from states.

        Data Quality:      See APG 64, first paragraph.
        FY 2000 APG 67:  Improve capacity of states, localities and tribes to conduct enforcement
                         and compliance assurance programs. EPA will provide grants, guidance
                         documents, training, classes and seminars, and assist with selected
                         inspections.

        (FY 1999)        Assist states and tribes with their enforcement and compliance assurance
                         and incentive programs.  EPA will provide specialized assistance and training,
                         including 83 courses, to state and tribal officials to enhance the effectiveness
                         of their programs.

        Performance Measures
         -  Number of EPA-assisted inspections to build capacity.
         -  Number of EPA training classes/seminars delivered to states/localities and tribes to build
           capacity.

        Explanation:     Goal met. EPA significantly exceeded its target of conducting EPA-assisted
                         inspections to improve capacity of states, localities and tribes. State/tribal
                         partners often request that EPA accompany them when they undertake
                         enforcement and compliance assurance site visits. EPA exceeded the target
                         for this first-time measure due to  difficulty in defining EPA-assisted
                         inspections. As a result EPA is considering increasing the target for this
                         measure in FY 2001. EPA missed its target for delivering training classes/
                         seminars to state/localities and tribes due to budget constraints but reached
                         the comparable number of students in FY 2000 as in FY 1999 through
                         distribution of computer-based and video-based training products. EPA is
                         adding new measures in FY 2001 including the number of tribal personnel
                         trained and the number of computer-based training modules developed.

        Data Source:     Manual  system. Reports on EPA-assisted inspections are completed by
                         regional staff and tracked by headquarters. Manual  reports also provide
                         information to National Enforcement Training Institute's (NETI) course
                         information management systems and the NETI registrar.

        Data Quality:     Data are manually verified.
3
§
•a
o
                      218
100
200
713
154
11-100
           EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
     FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                          FY 2000
                                                                                     Planned    Actual
                   FY 1999
                   Actual
        PROMOTE THE REGULATED COMMUNITIES'VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL
            REQUIREMENTS THROUGH COMPLIANCE INCENTIVES AND ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS.
FY 2000 APG: 68:  Increase entities self-policing and self-correction of environmental
                 problems through use of EPA incentive policies: small business, small
                 community and audit policies over FY 1997 levels.

Performance Measure
 -  Number of facilities that self-disclose potential violations.

Explanation:      Goal met. EPA exceeded its goal of increasing entities' self-policing and
                 self-correction of environmental problems because of unexpected increases
                 in the number of facilities using the policies. Increased publicity about the
                 modified policies and Agency initiatives-especially those involving
                 companies with multiple facilities nationwide-and the cooperation of these
                 companies, contributed to the successful outcome. EPA revised this measure
                 for FY 2001 to reflect the completion of settlements with facilities to
                 voluntarily self-disclose and correct violations. However, EPA does not expect
                 the large one-time increase in number of self-disclosures in  FY 2000 to stay
                 at that same high level in FY 2001. EPA will expand efforts to specifically
                 encourage disclosure from companies suspected of having serious
                 violations, which, as a class, occur less frequently and require more complex
                 analysis to address.

Data Source:      The DOCKET System tracks EPA civil, judicial and administrative
                 enforcement actions.

Data Quality:      This is the first year of relying on the DOCKET system for the data. EPA is in
                 the process of assessing data quality and identifying any necessary changes.
346
          2,200
                     No
                   FY1999
                     APG
                                   FY 1999 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS
                                    (NO LONGER REPORTED FOR FY 2000)
         Target high priority areas for enforcement and compliance assistance and complete baseline data assessment in major
         databases needed to measure quality of key indicators of compliance. The Agency will identify five high priority areas
         and improve two data systems.

         Increase regulated community's use of compliance incentives and their understanding of, and ability to comply with,
         regulatory requirements. The Agency will continue to operate nine small business compliance assistance centers and will
         complete sector notebooks, guides, and other outreach materials begun in FY 1998.
                                                                                                                      I
                                                                                            FY 2000 GPRA Perfomance
                                                                                                                  11-101

-------
   Goal 10 FY 2000 Obligations
              S438M
   Note: EPA FY 2000 Obligations
        were $8,974 million
                                      GOAL  10: EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT
                                 EPA will establish a management infrastructure that will set
                                  and implement the highest quality standards for effective
                                            management and fiscal responsibility.
OVERVIEW

    EPA management provides vision, leadership, and
support for all Agency programs. The effectiveness of
EPAs management and the delivery of administrative
services will determine, in large measure, the Agency's
success in achieving its environmental mission. Sound
leadership, proactive  human resources management,
rational policy guidance, innovation,  quality customer
service, consultation  with stakeholders, results-based
planning and budgeting, and fiscal responsibility provide
the foundation for everything EPA does to advance the
protection of human health and the  environment. In
addition work  under Goal 10 ensures that EPA's
management systems  and processes will be supported
by independent evaluations that promote operational
integrity and efficient, effective programs. As stated in
the Overview and Analysis section, EPA has made
progress in strengthening results-based management
through its planning and accountability processes and is
working to promote more outcome-oriented goals and
measures to further improve performance measurement.
EPA has made significant progress  in ensuring the
security of its financial  systems consistent with the
Federal Financial Management Improvement Act.
    In fulfilling its  managerial commitments, the
Agency focuses on five overarching priorities: managing
human capital,  streamlining business processes  and
meeting customer needs, investing in  infrastructure,
protecting children's health, and improving management
and program operations.

FY 2000 PERFORMANCE

Managing Human Capital

    The  Agency  faces a number of  challenges in
managing its  human  capital resources, including the
expected retirement of a large number of senior
employees, which threatens to deplete EPA's pool of
critical skills: retaining and recruiting a highly skilled
and diverse professional and technical staff; providing
employees with the  competencies they need to
effectively address the Agency's  strategic goals; and
building a sense of community while recognizing
differences as contributions to the whole.

                    VALUES

  EPA respects and values integrity, the trust and
  confidence  of the public, diversity of cultures and
  thinking, competence, innovation, continuous
  learning, and sound science. We treat our people fairly
  and with respect, and encourage a spirit of teamwork
  and the consistent practice of these values.
   Source: YLuman Capital Strategy
    To address these issues the Agency drafted a
strategic plan for investing in human resources, the
"Strategy for Human Capital." The Strategy represents
the first time EPA has developed a strategic direction
for investing in and managing its human resources. To
support the Strategy, the Agency has:

•   Tested five pilot training courses to provide Agency
    mid-level managers with the competencies they
    need to successfully support the EPA mission.

•   Implemented the Agency's  Hispanic and Asian
    Outreach Strategies to enhance  the career
    development  and recruitment of Hispanics and
    Asians in federal employment.

•   Recruited the third class of interns, which will
    provide the Agency with a diverse, high-potential
    cadre of future leaders.
E.
p

                                                                                  FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                     11-103

-------
•a
o
•   Completed a. Labor Relations Strategic Plan that
    established specific targets for the Agency managers
    and union representatives to aim for over the next
    12 months.
    In FY 2000 EPA  made inroads  in promoting
diversity and fairness  in the workplace  by tasking
managers and employees to  continue to work
collaboratively in  accomplishing the goals of the
Agency's Diversity Action Plan and ensuring review of
the Agency's hiring, promotion, and award practices.
Following the plan also ensured that EPA employees
were trained in working with tribes on  a government-
to-government basis to enhance the protection of tribes
and tribal lands. The Agency's recruitment program was
modified in 2000 to decentralize the management  of
recruitment activities to the regional and field human
resources offices. Agencywide  progress in 2000 has
demonstrated improvement in minority representation
within the Senior Executive Service (SES). An increase
in the number of minorities and women also occurred
in the SES feeder groups, GS-13 and above. Please see
Section III - Management Accomplishments and Challenges
for a further discussion of the above issues.

Streamlining Business Processes and Meeting
Customer Needs
    In FY 2000 EPA  took a  number of  steps  to
streamline and automate its administrative systems and
processes to provide the best customer service at the
least cost and burden to the taxpayer. For example,  EPA
is automating the entire travel reimbursement process
to obtain a significant reduction in administrative
burden. EPA earned a prestigious federal award  in
recognition  of its  efforts,  along with several other
agencies, to  implement an online system  that allows
employees to view and update many payroll and benefits
options such as health plan choices. The Agency also
made substantial progress in replacing its aging payroll
system, and efforts are  now under way to  replace the
Integrated Financial Management System.  In addition
EPA developed a financial data warehouse to improve
Agency access to a range of financial and program data
to better manage programs. EPA  also  reduced
administrative burden and improved customer service
by consolidating several local payment functions, and
the resources  saved were redirected to support
environmental goals.
    In the area of  financial management, two major
accomplishments have  improved EPA's ability to set
priorities and manage for results.  First, a major new
accounting methodology adopted for the Superfund
Trust Fund will increase cost recoveries for that
program  and serve as a model for indirect cost
accounting in other programs. Second, EPA continues
to take aggressive steps to promptly redirect unspent
funds from inactive contracts and assistance agreements
to other site response activities where funding is needed.
For example, in FY 2000 the Agency redirected about
$166 million in unspent funds within the Superfund
Program.

    Increased use of automation continues to improve
EPA's ability to manage for results, reduce burden, and
gain efficiencies. The Agency added cost accounting
features to its Budget Automation System in FY 2000
so that the system more clearly links budgetary resources
with the  achievement of environmental results.
Measurable results of EPA's automation efforts include
$775,000 in rebates and discounts for prompt payment
earned in FY 2000 as well as  continued reduction of
overhead costs through the electronic transfer of funds.
In FY 2000  virtually all payments to contractors and
employee salary payments were  made electronically
rather than by check.

    Throughout FY 2000 EPA continued to introduce
innovative  approaches to  providing  electronic
commerce for both the grants and contracts programs.
For example, Agency grant recipients are beginning to
benefit directly from a new system that allows them to
request their funds online. The Agency brought all 11
Grants Management  Offices  online and fully
implemented Phase  I  of the Integrated Grants
Management System, a paperless  programmatic and
administrative system that will fully automate the grants
process  from pre-award activities to closeout. EPA is
now in a position to accept electronic applications from
grantees and make electronic awards, making the grant
process  faster and more user-friendly. In the area of
contracts management, significant progress was made
during FY 2000 in developing a Program  Office
Interface  for the Integrated Contracts Management
System. This new interface will streamline and automate
communications and provide for the electronic routing
of contracts-related documents among program offices,
contracting offices, and EPA contractors.  The Agency
has achieved significant improvements in increasing the
percentage of performance-based contracts, which are
considered  more cost-effective  and result  in  the
contractors assuming a greater share of the risk. EPA
11-104
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
had set a performance goal of awarding 11 percent of
its new  procurements  as performance-based by
FY 2000 and exceeded that goal by awarding 14 percent
of its contracts as performance-based.

Investing in EPA's Infrastructure
   EPA has  a master  plan for  making ongoing
investments in state-of-the-art construction  and
infrastructure  renovations to its office facilities  and
laboratories to  provide a safe and healthy environment
for its employees and the  surrounding communities. In
FY 2000 the Agency continued its commitment to using
"Green Power"—renewable  electric power—for its
facilities. The Agency purchased  100 percent renewable
energy for three regional laboratories: Golden, Colorado;
Manchester, Washington; and Chelmsford, Massachusetts.
This  action will reduce the Agency's dependence on fossil
energy, comply with lower energy consumption goals
under Executive Order 13123, and promote market
penetration of  renewable energy technologies.

   A key component of this master plan is the  new
headquarters project, which is  unique in the federal
building universe. The design work focuses on achieving
indoor  air  quality and energy efficiency, and it
incorporates sustainable  design practices  within the
context of  federal design and procurement practices.
The  Agency was assigned 1.2 million square feet of
space in the Federal Triangle to serve as its consolidated
headquarters. Although this was not enough space to
accommodate  all of the  EPA headquarters staff, the
Agency accepted the new assignment because of the
need to vacate Waterside Mall and the desirability of
the Federal Triangle location.  In FY 2000 the Agency
moved additional employees, bringing the total number
of employees relocated to  the new headquarters
complex to 3,400. Over the  next 20  months, an
additional 2,500 people will be moved.
   EPA also continued to promote the Laboratories
for the 21st Century (Labs21) initiative. In conjunction
with the U.S.  Department of Energy, the Agency
provided technical assistance to pilot laboratory partners
from the federal, state, and private  sectors, sharing
technical information and innovative whole-laboratory
designs  for reducing pollution and energy and water
consumption. In September 2000 Labs21 became apart
of Project XL (eXcellence and Leadership), a voluntary
program that encourages state and local government
agencies, businesses, and federal facilities to test cleaner,
cheaper, and smarter ways to  attain environmental
     LABS  FOR  THE  21ST  CENTURY

results  superior  to those achieved under current
regulations and policies. The web site for the Labs21
initiative is http://www.epa.gov/Iabs21century.
    EPA has implemented an aggressive strategy to
reduce energy  consumption in its  facilities.  Results
include a 19 percent decrease in energy consumption
in Agency-owned laboratories—from 374,000 Btu/ft2
in 1985 to 304,000 Btu/ft2 in 2000. By FY 2001 the
Agency will have begun operations at three new energy-
efficient laboratories.

Protecting Children's Health
    In FY 2000 EPA made significant progress in its
efforts to protect children from potential environmental
hazards. The Agency provided leadership for federal
efforts to address asthma and lead poisoning (two major
children's health issues) and raised awareness about the
effects  of exposure to environmental hazards on
children by incorporating environmental health issues
into the activities of youth organizations. EPA reshaped
its policy on science and risk assessment for children's
environmental health, guiding the development of an
Agency-wide strategy for  research on environmental
risks to children. In addition action was taken to reduce
risks to  children by considering such risks specifically
in new and reevaluated standards and regulations.
    In August 2000 EPA issued the Interim Evaluation
Report of the Child Health Champion Community Pilot
Program  established in 11 communities across the
United States. The evaluation assessed the  feasibility
of  community-led  approaches to children's  health
protection and how best to support such efforts in the
future. Interim report findings indicated that broad-
based community participation  efforts are difficult
without  funding;  tension  exists between  local
community empowerment and federal laws and policies
(including funding limitations on activities); and limited
local information and data on human health issues
hinder planning for local action.  All 11 communities,
despite the difficulties and limitations, are continuing
their efforts to implement  their programs in FY 2001.
e.
5
                                                                                   FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                       11-105

-------
Improving Management and Program Operations

    The Agency's Office of Inspector General (OIG)
met its goal to increase its effectiveness in detecting
and deterring fraud and other improprieties  by
increasing the number of assistance agreement and
contract cases, improving the percentage of cases
referred for action, and reducing the average time for
case completion. The OIG continued to emphasize an
investigative initiative to uncover criminal activity in the
awarding and  delivery of  assistance agreements and
contracts. Fraud awareness briefings, an important part
of fraud prevention and detection efforts, were held
for EPA employees and state and local law enforcement
organizations to address vulnerabilities to fraud, waste,
and abuse. In addition the OIG developed an initiative
to perform  investigations  of intrusive activities that
affect the Agency's computer systems  and to partner
with other  agencies in the growing  effort to protect
government computer systems. Overall investigative
activity resulted in $70.8 million in  fines,  recoveries,
restitutions, and savings and 105 judicial, administrative,
and other actions. OIG investigations consistently
yielded significant monetary and environmental results,
as indicated in the following examples:
•   An  EPA  contractor  agreed to a $24 million
    settlement in a  civil  lawsuit alleging that the
    company billed government agencies for computer
    center costs in excess of the costs actually incurred.
•   A firm agreed to a $35 million settlement in a civil
    lawsuit alleging that it had charged excessive lease
    costs to EPA and several other government
    agencies.
•   A company agreed to pay $1.75 million in  fines
    and restitution for failing to disclose to government
    officials that the wastewater it discharged directly
    into Dryman Bay in Sarasota County, Florida, was
    not properly treated.
    The OIG provided timely, independent auditing
and consulting services responsive to the needs of
customers and stakeholders by identifying means and
opportunities  for increased economy,  efficiency, and
effectiveness in achieving environmental results. The
OIG  made its audit products  and services more
customer-  and goal-driven by implementing  an
extensive  customer input and survey process,
reengineering the audit planning and development
process, and expanding advisory services. As a result
the OIG  achieved its  highest level of customer
                                                                    OIG PROFILE OF PERFORMANCE
                                                            / Questioned Costs/Savings (millions)
                                                            >/ Environmental Program Improvements    78
                                                            >/ Fines, Recoveries, Settlements (millions)   $71
                                                            >/ Criminal, Civil, Administrative Actions    105
                                                            / Customer Service Rating                 76%
                                                           ^                                           ^

                                                          satisfaction as  determined through surveys of EPA
                                                          management and staff. The OIG added four new areas
                                                          to its list of Agency Top Ten Management Challenges
                                                          provided annually to Congress. In addition the OIG
                                                          made numerous recommendations  for improving
                                                          Agency business practices  and environmental results,
                                                          including the following areas (1) submitting timely and
                                                          complete financial statements that are accurate and have
                                                          adequate accounting support, (2) strengthening controls
                                                          over access to sensitive data on the Agency's mainframe
                                                          computer, and (3) operating a viable asbestos inspection
                                                          program  to ensure that school districts comply with
                                                          the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act.

                                                             The OIG developed a new strategic plan that charts a
                                                          course  through  FY 2005.   It  builds  on  past
                                                          accomplishments and establishes new directions for
                                                          contributing to improved environmental quality and
                                                          human health. This plan will be enhanced through the
                                                          creation of a new OIG Office of Program Evaluation to
                                                          assess the linkage and impact of EPA actions and
                                                          programs. The OIG's  challenge is to perform work related
                                                          to each of EPA's ten goals and measure progress and
                                                          performance using a "balanced scorecard" combining
                                                          outcomes, financial indicators, and customer satisfaction
                                                          rather than the traditional monetary results approach.

                                                             Additionally the OIG  implemented an outreach
                                                          plan for improving OIG performance. The plan was
                                                          designed to involve customers and stakeholders in
                                                          planning the products and services for delivery, measure
                                                          performance in meeting customers' needs, promote the
                                                          benefits and value of OIG work and seek opportunity
                                                          for collaborative partnerships.  For example, the OIG
                                                          formed  the Environmental  Consortium  of the
                                                          President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency, which
                                                          includes the General Accounting Office (GAO) and
                                                          19 executive agencies, whose goal is to achieve greater
                                                          efficiencies and more effective solutions to cross-cutting
                                                          environmental issues. The OIG is also developing
                                                          similar partnerships with state environmental agencies.
11-106
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF FY 2000
PERFORMANCE

    The Agency made tremendous progress toward
achieving Goal 10 and its objectives. Many significant
steps were taken to strengthen the integrity of program
operations. EPA has developed a strategic approach to
manage human capital, took a number of steps to
streamline and automate various administrative systems
and processes, continued to reduce energy consumption
in its facilities, made significant progress in efforts to
protect children from potential environmental hazards,
and increased effectiveness in detecting and deterring
fraud and other improprieties.

STRENGTHENING PROGRAM INTEGRITY
THROUGH IMPROVED MANAGEMENT

    EPA completed several major actions in FY 2000
to strengthen the management of the taxpayers' dollars
used to support the  Agency's grant and  contract
programs. The Agency implemented a comprehensive
strategy of technical  assistance, monitoring, and
oversight to help ensure that grantees properly expend
federal funds on ongoing projects and achieve results
that will benefit the public. In addition the Agency
closed out an estimated backlog of 20,000 grants
originally reported to Congress in July 1996, ensuring
that all unused funds were deobligated and redirected
to other environmental projects  or returned to the
Federal Treasury. In the contracts area, EPA negotiated
a settlement with two major contractors in which the
government and the U.S. taxpayers realized $390 million
in savings.
    EPA has taken numerous steps  to remedy the
problems that led to a qualified audit opinion from the
Inspector General on its FY 1999  financial statements
and is pleased to report that the FY 2000 statements
have  earned an unqualified  opinion.  Recent
improvements include strengthening quality controls
and financial systems  security; developing additional
policies  and procedures for preparing the statements;
providing expert training to  the Agency's  financial
management staff; and compiling interim  financial
statements for use as a "dry-run" to identify potential
problems.  EPA also contracted with the Department
of the Treasury for technical assistance and focused
on  recruiting  and   hiring experienced  staff
knowledgeable about federal accounting standards. EPA
continues  to improve  its capabilities  related to  cost
accounting, illustrated by revisions to the account
structure that linked the Agency's financial resources
to the elements of the Strategic Plan.
    In FY 2000 EPA made progress in improving the
security of financial information systems, but additional
measures are needed to meet the security challenges of
the rapidly changing cyber world and effectively move
toward electronic government. Reviews of Agency
security practices by GAO and OIG revealed a number
of vulnerabilities. In response EPA has thoroughly
evaluated its current practices and is implementing cost-
effective means of ensuring the security of the Agency's
financial information systems  and the transactions
processed. For example, EPA established a cross-office
financial  information security council; updated
hardware and software; initiated a structured process
to identify, assess, and mitigate risks; and improved
financial system documentation,  technical  and
management controls, and security training.

    The OIG identified accountability as a management
challenge for the  Agency, stating that EPA needs to
take further action to  develop accountability systems
that tie performance to its organizational goals.  The
Agency  has made significant progress to strengthen
results-based management, and it continues to work
toward more effectively linking assessments of program
performance  with  resource  decisions  as well as
identifying goals and measures that will allow for trends
analysis over time. EPA has efforts underway to improve
cost accounting to better link budgetary resources with
the achievement of environmental results and to
provide for more informed decision-making In addition
the Agency is replacing its aging financial and payroll
systems and improving the use of automation to reduce
burden and gain efficiencies.
    The Agency  is  undertaking several  actions to
improve its ability to manage administrative complaints
alleging discrimination under Title VI of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964. Title VI prohibits discrimination on the
basis of  race, color, or national origin by any entity that
receives federal financial assistance. EPA's Title VI
complaints investigation program has had difficulty
meeting regulatory deadlines for processing  and
investigating complaints. The Agency is temporarily
assigning additional case managers  to expedite
processing and reduce the current backlog of 61 Title
VI  complaints that require an investigation or a
jurisdictional determination. In  addition the Agency is
e.
5
                                                                                 FY 2000 GPRA Performance
                                                                                                     11-107

-------
•a
o
    working to improve its long-term efficiency by
    developing needed guidance on processing complaints
    and by reducing the processing time for sending letters
    on acceptance, rejection, or referral of complaints.
        Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires
    implementation and management of an effective federal
    discrimination complaints process that provides
    employees  and applicants  for employment an
    opportunity to seek redress. The  Agency has several
    problems that adversely affect the timeliness of the
    discrimination complaints process, including lack of
    accurate and timely data in the tracking system; late,
    incomplete, or missing discussions of allegations in
    counselors' reports; and insufficient contractor support.
    The Agency has initiated several corrective actions to
    be fully implemented by September 2001, including
    weekly monitoring of all actions in the discrimination
    complaints inventory and the recruitment and hiring
    of four additional employees for the Title VII team.

        Over  the  past several years, the Agency has
    undertaken a comprehensive strategy to streamline the
    grants management process, provide ongoing assistance
    agreement training and ensure  accountability for
    oversight responsibilities. During FY 2001 the Agency
    plans to conduct a  series of management assessment
    reviews in EPA program offices and regions to assess
    the adequacy of the administrative and programmatic
    management of assistance  agreements.  EPA will
    continue, on an ongoing basis, to provide training for
    EPA staff and to conduct periodic reviews to ensure
    ongoing compliance with Agency policy and federal
    laws relative to assistance agreements.
        Please see Section III - Management Accomplishments
    and'Challenges'for a further discussion of the above issues.

    PROGRAM EVALUATION

        EPA undertook several evaluations in FY 2000 to
    review the effectiveness of its program strategies and
    guidance in achieving program goals and safeguarding
    resources.
    •   Conducted a program evaluation that led to the
        redesign of the business processes of  the EPA
        Computer Center. The Center provides a range of
        computing services to Agency customers and is
        supported by customer payments. The new design
        features streamlined business practices and a new
    rate structure that more accurately aligns prices for
    services with the Center's costs.
•   Executed an annual review of its General Services
    Administration leased space. The review verified
    space measurements, ensured that EPA was billed
    correctly, validated space utilization needs, and
    ensured that  rents were comparable  to prevailing
    market rates. This careful management of EPA's
    inventory has ensured the best possible utilization
    of space and has yielded the Agency substantial
    savings.
•   Conducted Management Oversight Reviews across
    the Agency to ensure that each Grants  Management
    Office engages in sound grants management
    practices and follows established  grant rules,
    regulations and policies.

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS OF FY 2000
PERFORMANCE ON FY 2001 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE PLAN

    Overall, FY 2000 performance under Goal 10 was
as expected, and FY 2001 Annual Performance Goals
(APGs) build on this success. EPA is improving
accountability for Agency results-based  management
processes and financial management functions by
developing more outcome-oriented goals and measures
and by incorporating feedback from customers and
stakeholders into its  annual performance goals and
measures.  In  developing  outcome-oriented
performance results, EPA has  committed to increasing
the  percentage of outcome-oriented  annual
performance goals and performance measures reported
in the Agency's FY 2002 Annual Performance Plan by
4 percent over FY 2001.

TABLES OF RESULTS
    The following tables include performance results
for the five FY 2000 APGs that appear in Goal 10. In
cases where  the FY 2000 APG is associated with an
FY 1999 APG, the table includes the FY 1999 APG
for ease in comparing performance. Additionally EPA
lists the FY 1999 APGs that are no longer reported for
FY 2000.
11-108     EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
                 FY 2000 Annual Report
Annual Performance Goals and Measures - Table of Results
fnHfnjH^ GOAL 10 " EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT
FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
FY 2000
Planned
Actual
FY 1999
Actual
THE OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR AND DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR WILL PROVIDE VISION AND
LEADERSHIP (WITHIN THE AGENCY, NATIONALLY AND INTERNATIONALLY) AS WELL AS EXECUTIVE
DIRECTION AND POLICY OVERSIGHT FOR ALL AGENCY PROGRAMS.
FY 2000 APG 69: Evaluate health outcomes related to environmental health effects for
asthma and lead addressed in 11 Pilot Child Health Champion
Communities.
Performance Measure
- Issue report on health outcomes.
Explanation: Goal met. EPA met this goal by issuing the Interim Evaluation Report of the
Child Health Champion Community Pilot Program in August 2000. The
interim evaluation focused on community-level coalition building, project
planning, and implementation planning processes within each of the 1 1
communities. The final report will provide a complete picture of activities,
findings, and lessons learned from the pilot program.
Data Source: All data are being provided by the communities. EPA will compile and analyze
the data supplied by the communities.
Data Quality: The communities are making every attempt to provide good quality data. The
data quality, however, will vary by community because of the types of
interventions being implemented, availability of health and non-health
outcome data, availability of database and database expertise, and limited
resources to assemble outcome data.
1
1
No
FY 1999
APG
EPA WILL PROVIDE THE MANAGEMENT SERVICES, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT AND FACILITY OPERATIONS
NECESSARYTO ACHIEVE ITS ENVIRONMENTAL MISSION AND TO MEET ITS FIDUCIARY AND
WORKFORCE RESPONSIBILITIES.
FY 2000 APG 70: 100 percent of EPA's Government Performance Results Act (GPRA)
implementation components (planning, budgeting, financial
management, accountability, and program analysis) are completed on
time and meet customer needs.
(FY 1999) By the end of 1999, the Agency can plan and track performance against
annual goals and capture 100% of costs through the new PBAA structure,
based on modified budget and financial accounting systems, a new
accountability process, and new cost accounting mechanisms.
Explanation: Goal not met. The Agency, however, did make notable progress toward the
goal as follows:
- EPA delivered its FY 1999 Annual Performance Report to Congress on
March, 31, 2000.
- EPA delivered the Revised Strategic Plan to Congress by September 30,
2000 meeting the GPRA requirements.
- EPA substantially improved internal processes and submitted the financial
statements on time. Although the Agency received a qualified audit opinion
from the Inspector General on the FY 1999 financial statements, EPA has
taken significant steps to remedy the issues raised and has earned an
unqualified opinion in FY 2000.
- EPA evaluated options for replacing its aging payroll system and made a
selection based on a thorough business case analysis. In 2000 EPA replaced
an ancillary financial reporting system with a data warehouse providing better
access and reporting capabilities, and enhanced the cost accounting
100%
85%
9/30/99
                                                                             e.
                                                                             5
                                                         FY 2000 GPRA Perfomance   11-109

-------
             FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
                                                                                                 FY 2000
                                                                    Planned    Actual
                                                                                         FY 1999
                                                                                                                 Actual
       Data Source:
       Data Quality:
 features of its Budget Automation System (BAS) to more closely link
 resources to accomplishments.  These cost-effective improvements, along
 with comprehensive efforts in security, enhanced EPA's financial systems
 capabilities. EPA plans to take advantage of the Joint Financial Management
 Improvement Program testing to support development of options for replacing
 its core Integrated Financial Management System (IFMS).

- EPA budgeting processes executed resource adjustments necessary to
 meet emerging  priorities to satisfy Agency and Congressional
 requirements.

The Performance and Environmental Results System (PERS) houses data
for GPRA performance goals and measures as a basis for the Annual
Performance Report. IFMS contains the data for the financial statements.
The BAS supports the budget processes.

Because PERS and BAS are databases that primarily house information
from Agency program databases, most of the quality assurance and control
efforts focus on ensuring effective data entry. EPA's quality assurance
program for  IFMS includes automated data checks and edits as well as
periodic quality assurance reviews.
       FY 2000 APG 71:  All 58 mission-critical systems will continue to support core Agency
                        functions without interruption across Year 2000 date change.

       (FY 1999)        All mission-critical systems will continue to support core Agency functions
                        without interruption across Year 2000 date change.

       Explanation:      Goal met. This Annual Performance Goal carried over in order to ensure that
                        all mission critical systems were Year 2000 (Y2K) compliant on
                        January 1 , 2000. EPA continued monitoring and maintenance of these
                        systems to ensure a smooth transition to Year 2000 date change.

       Data Source:      Manual system.

       Data Quality:      Data are manually verified.
                                                                     100%
                                                                                100%
                                                                                         100%
        EPA WILL PROVIDE A QUALITY WORK ENVIRONMENT THAT CONSIDERS EMPLOYEE SAFETY AND SECURITY,
              BUILDING OPERATIONS, UTILITIES, FACILITIES, NEW CONSTRUCTION, REPAIRS, AND POLLUTION
                                 PREVENTION, WITHIN HEADQUARTERS AND NATIONWIDE.
       FY 2000 APG 72:  EPA will ensure that all new and ongoing construction projects are
                        progressing and completed as scheduled.

       (FY 1999)        Complete at least 50% of construction of the consolidated research lab at
                        Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

       (FY 1999)        Continue renovation of the new consolidated headquarters complex,
                        completing 100% build out of the Ariel Rios north and Wilson Building, and
                        50% of the Interstate Commerce Commission, and moving 38% of EPA
                        personnel from vacated spaces to the new consolidated complex.

       Performance Measures
        - Percentage of new Research Triangle Park building construction completed.
        - Percentage of the Interstate Commerce Commission construction completed.
        - Percentage of EPA personnel consolidated into Headquarters complex.

       Explanation:     Goal met. Construction completion is progressing as planned.

       Data Source:     Manual system.

       Data Quality:     Data are manually verified.
                                                                     80%
                                                                     80%
                                                                     40%
80%
80%
40%
                                                                                          60%


                                                                                          90%
                                                                                          50%
                                                                                          31%
11-110
          EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
FY 2000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
FY 2000
Planned
Actual
FY 1999
Actual
EPA WILL PROVIDE AUDIT AND INVESTIGATIVE PRODUCTS AND SERVICES, ALL OF WHICH CAN FACILITATE
THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF ITS MISSION.
FY 2000 APG 73: Office of Audit will provide timely, independent auditing and consulting
services responsive to the needs of our customers and stakeholders by
identifying means and opportunities for increased economy, efficiency,
and effectiveness in achieving environmental results.
(FY 1999) In 1999, the OIG will provide objective, timely and independent auditing,
consulting, and investigative services through such actions as completing 15
construction grant closeout audits.
Performance Measures
- Potential monetary value of recommendations, questioned costs, savings and recoveries.
- Examples of the Office of Inspector General (OIG) recommendations or actions taken to
improve economy, efficiency, and effectiveness.
- Overall, customer and stakeholder satisfaction with audit products and services.
Explanation: Goal met. The OIG met its annual performance goal of providing timely,
independent auditing and consulting services. Although the monetary value
resulting from the work was less than projected, the OIG identified the
amount of ineligible, unsupported, and unnecessary/unreasonable costs to
the extent possible in the audits performed. Monetary estimates are based on
professional judgment since there is no way of determining in advance
precisely the amounts of disallowed costs.
Data Source: The database for the OIG recommendations and the potential monetary
value of recommendations, questioned costs, savings, and recoveries is the
Inspector General Operations and Reporting System. There is no formal
database for customer/stakeholder satisfaction; information for these areas is
extracted from audit reports and survey responses.
Data Quality: The OIG will continue working in FY 2001 to strengthen data quality in the
Inspector General Operations and Reporting System.



$64 M
63
75%






$55.3 M
78
76%




24

S128.8M
60
75%



                          FY 1999 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS
                            (NO LONGER REPORTED FOR FY 2000)
By the end of 1999, evaluate five EPA regulations to ensure they are protective of children's health.

EPA will improve the quality, effectiveness and efficiency of EPA's acquisition and contract management process by
completing 10% of contracts utilizing performance-based statement of works.

Implement Phase 1 of the Integrated Grants Management System award module in all regions.
                                                                                                              e.
                                                                                                              5
                                                                                    FY 2000 GPRA Perfomance
                                                                                                          11-111

-------
            FY2000
   ANNUAL REPORT
     MANAGEMENT
ACCOMPLISHMENTS
  AND CHALLENGES
 ^9
S
      I
      fl
 m
           SECTION III

-------
             MANAGEMENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CHALLENGES
    One of the most critical challenges facing federal
managers today is preserving the public's trust in the
integrity of  government  programs.  The  U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is strongly
committed to achieving its goals and objectives in a manner
that maintains this integrity. Over the past  several years
EPA senior managers have placed a high priority on
strengthening  results-based management and overall
accountability and on improving the efficiency and
effectiveness of environmental programs.

    Section III provides a comprehensive discussion of
EPAs management and performance challenges and the
Agency's strategy to resolve these issues. (The  most
significant of these, and their relevance to the achievement
of the Agency's mission, are also addressed in the preceding
goal chapters.) This section also meets reporting
requirements of the Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act
(FMFIA), The Inspector General Act Amendments, and the
Reports Consolidation Act of 2000, as discussed below
    Integrity weaknesses and major  management
challenges represent deficiencies in program policies,
guidance, or procedures that may impair the Agency's
ability to achieve its mission and weaken the safeguards
against fraud, waste,  abuse, and mismanagement. These
issues are identified through internal Agency reviews and
through independent reviews  and audits by the General
Accounting Office (GAO), the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), and EPAs Office of Inspector
General (OIG). EPA managers work diligently to identify
strategies to address these issues, set milestones, and take
prompt  corrective action.  For some  management
problems the Agency has put annual performance goals
in place to trackprogress. Currently, two of the five integrity
weaknesses and five of the 19 management challenges
are  linked to Government Performance and Results Act
(GPRA) goals. Although the Agency does not have specific
goals for all integrity weaknesses and major management
challenges, EPAs senior leadership monitors all problems
closely.

    Under FMFIA, all federal agencies must submit an
annual Integrity Act Report to the President and Congress
and provide reasonable assurance that policies, procedures,
and guidance are adequate to support the achievement of
their intended mission, goals, and objectives. Agencies also
must report material weaknesses—those deficiencies that
are  found to impair achievement of their missions—and
identify corrective action strategies being instituted to
remedy the problems. EPA senior managers periodically
report to the Administrator on efforts under way to address
material weaknesses and other less serious but important
problems. EPA's record  in correcting its integrity
weaknesses has steadily improved over the past decade.
Since 1990 EPA has corrected 27  integrity weaknesses
and numerous major management challenges.

                FISCAL YEAR 2000
         ANNUAL ASSURANCE STATEMENT*
   I am pleased to report that EPA's  annual self-
   assessments of the Agency's internal controls,
   management and financial control systems, with
   the exception of  noted material weaknesses,
   provide reasonable assurance that the Agency's
   programs and resources are protected from fraud,
   waste, and mismanagement.
                  Carol M. Browner
                  Administrator
   * Assurance statement is required by December 31,2000
   under the Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act.

    The Inspector General Act Amendments of 1988 require
federal agencies to report to Congress twice a year on the
status of efforts to carry out corrective actions and reach
final action on OIG audits. EPA managers are vigilant in
carrying out timely and effective audit management
practices. Since 1996 the number of audits without final
action one year after the management decision has
decreased  by nearly 50 percent. In FY 2000 EPA was
responsible for 503 audits; by year's end 40 were without
final action one year after the management decision date.
    As required by the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000,
OIG's list of top management challenges facing the
Agency along with its assessment of EPA's progress  in
addressing these challenges is included at the end of this
section. The Agency's response to the OIG statement is
included as part of the discussion of corrective action
strategies for integrity weaknesses and major management
challenges.
                                                                   FY 2000 Management Accomplishments and Challenges
                                                                                                        III-l

-------
                                         INTEGRITY ACT REPORT
        The  Agency is  declaring three new material
    weaknesses for FY 2001 on Title VI and VII of the
    Civil Rights Act of  1964 and  Information Systems
    Security and is continuing to address two weaknesses
    from  the previous fiscal year: National Pollutant
    Discharge Elimination System  (NPDES) Permits and
    Construction Grants Closeout. These  are described
    below, along with a summary of corrective actions and
    expected completion dates.
    1. Backlog of Title VI (Civil Rights Act of 1964)
    Discrimination Complaints (Goal 10): Title VI prohibits
    discrimination on the basis  of  race, color, or national
    origin by any entity that receives  federal financial
    assistance. The  number of Title VI administrative
    complaints  that require  an investigation  or a
    jurisdictional determination by EPA is 61 and growing.
    EPA's program  to investigate Title VI complaints
    generally does not meet regulatory deadlines for
    processing and investigating complaints.

        Corrective Action Strategy: In addition to the four
    temporary employees hired as Title VI case managers
    for 2-year terms, four employees will be detailed to the
    Office of Civil Rights from regions and programs to
    complete a civil rights investigation. By the end of the
    third quarter FY 2001 EPA will improve the long-term
    efficiency of the program by finalizing Draft Revised
    Investigations Guidance, issuing final guidance
    regarding alleged discrimination against persons with
    limited  English proficiency,  issuing  standardized
    procedures  on preparing  complaints for  the
    investigation  process,  and drafting protocols for
    conducting adverse  impact analyses and statistical
    demographic analyses. Completion of corrective actions
    is expected by the end of FY 2001.

    2. Deficiencies in Internal Employment Discrimination
    Complaints Resolution Process under Title VII (Civil
    Rights Act of 1964)  (Goal 10): Title VII requires that
    EPA  implement and manage an effective  federal
    discrimination complaints process that provides
    employees  and applicants  for  employment an
    opportunity to seek redress. Difficulty in managing the
    Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) process in a
    timely manner is attributable to several factors, including
    inadequately trained counselors; lack of accurate and
    timely data in the tracking system; late, incomplete, and/
    or missing discussion  of allegations in counselors'
    reports;  an inability to utilize the automated data
tracking system effectively; insufficient contractor
support to manage the investigations process; and a
lack of  staff to handle the current inventory of 269
complaints.

    Corrective Action Strategy:  Corrective actions
currently under way include utilizing attorneys  from
the Civil Rights Law Office to review and provide advice
on final Agency decisions; to provide regions with
monthly status reports on the inventory of complaints
and overdue reports and with feedback on inadequate
submissions; and to devote more attention to each area
of the  process currently needing improvement.
Completion of corrective  actions is  expected by
September 2001.

3. Information System Security (Goal 7): EPA needs
a centralized security program with strong oversight
processes  to address risks  adequately and ensure that
valuable  information technology resources and
environmental data are secure. The  Agency is
strengthening its information security program by
instituting a comprehensive strategy that addresses all
security-related deficiencies, including currently
identified  weaknesses covering Information Systems
Security Plans and Cyber Security. In doing so, EPA is
taking a systematic approach to correct its information
security weakness by FY 2002. (FY 1997-2000 OIG
major management challenge;FY 2000 GAO and OMB major
management challenge; declared a material weakness FY 1997
and an expanded material weakness FY 2000.)

    Corrective Action Strategy:  Though EPA has
corrected the most serious security vulnerabilities,
several significant milestones remain. Corrective actions
currently under way include completing security risk
assessments of critical applications and systems,
evaluating network and data security, installing network
intrusion detection and monitoring controls, conducting
training, certifying security plans for all critical security
systems, finalizing EPA's National Network Security
Policy, validating success of policy and guidance, and
conducting random program office formal security plan
reviews of  mission-critical systems. All corrective
actions are expected to be completed by the end of
FY 2002.  (Also see OIG List of EPA Top Management
Challenges^)
III-2
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
4. National Pollutants Discharge  Elimination
System Permits (Goal 2): The backlog in EPA-issued
major permits has tripled over the past 10 years, and
the backlog in state-issued permits has doubled over
that time. As the universe of NPDES permits expands
to cover storm water and concentrated animal feeding
operations, the backlog is likely to increase unless
additional effort  is exerted. The expanding backlog
threatens the environment, because expired NPDES
permits may not reflect the  most recent applicable
effluent limitation guidelines,  water quality standards,
or Total Maximum Daily Loads. EPA headquarters and
regional offices are working together closely to track
both Agency and state-issued permit efforts. (FY 1998-
2000 OIG Management Challenge; declared a material weakness
FY 1998.)

    Corrective Action Strategy: During the past year EPA's
Deputy Administrator sent a memorandum to Regional
Administrators directing them to submit  a current
backlog reduction plan for every state and territory in
each region by May 15, 2000. The backlog reduction
strategies developed by  the regions reaffirm regional
and state commitments to meet the Agency's backlog
reduction targets. During FY 2000 the backlog  of
NPDES permits was  reduced from 46 percent  to
30 percent. EPA  expects to eliminate the backlog by
FY 2005. (Also see OIG List of EPA Top Management
Challenges^)
5. Construction Grants Close Out (Goal 2): Without
timely closeout of construction grants, millions of
dollars in potentially ineligible program costs cannot
be recovered for use in other high-priority state clean
water projects. (FY 19920MB candidate material weakness;
declared an Agency weakness FY 1992; elevated to a material
weakness FY 1996.)

    Corrective Action Strategy: The Construction Grants
Completion/Closeout Strategy developed in 1990
required EPA to assess the remaining workload in each
region every year,  to identify the bottlenecks, and to
enter into agreement on a closeout plan and follow-up
actions. States are required to submit annual work plans
and  closeout strategies. The number of open grants
has decreased from 5,860 in 1990 to 177 in 2000, and
EPA expects to complete corrective actions in FY 2002.

    As shown in the accompanying table, EPA has made
significant progress over  the years to correct integrity
weaknesses  reported to the President and  Congress.
Since 1997  the Agency has not reported any new
financial nonconformances, which are failures of a
financial system to  comply with  government
requirements.
STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE
Material Weaknesses
Section 2

1988-
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Total
Reported

44
1
1
0
3
49
Corrected

39
3
0
1
1
44
Pending

5
3
4
3
5
5










Financial Nonconformances
Section 4

1988-
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Total
Reported

18
0
0
0
0
18
Corrected

15
3
0
0
0
18
Pending

3
0
0
0
0
0
                                                                   FY 2000 Management Accomplishments and Challenges
                                                                                                        III-3

-------
                                   MAJOR MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES
        This portion of  Section III presents  a. brief
    description  and summary  of activities planned in
    response to  19  management challenges identified by
    GAO, OMB, OIG, and EPA itself. The Agency will
    continue to use the tools available under GPRA and
    other management statutes to assist in addressing these
    issues. Five of the 19 major management challenges
    are linked to GPRA  goals and measures. Twelve of
    EPAs management challenges are being addressed as
    internal Agency weaknesses  for which the Agency
    develops specific and measurable corrective actions and
    reports on progress to the Administrator.

    1. Relationships with States (NEPPS) (Cross-goal,
    addressed in the "Overview and Analysis"): Under
    the National Environmental Performance Partnership
    System (NEPPS), the Agency committed to long-term
    collaboration with state agencies to improve EPA and
    state management of national environmental programs.
    (FY 1999 GAO major management challenge;FY 2000 GAO
    and OIG major management challenge.)

        Corrective Action  Strategy: A national EPA-state
    workshop reviewed evaluations  and developed the
    following recommendations for strengthening NEPPS:
    (1) recommit to the fundamental principles of NEPPS;
    (2) coordinate and integrate systems/programs; and (3)
    improve performance measures. Actions taken in
    response to these recommendations include reaffirming
    EPAs commitment to NEPPS; designating "NEPPS
    Leaders" at the senior management, mid-management,
    and staff levels; producing a crosswalk of GPRA annual
    performance measures and NEPPS core performance
    measures; completing an internal training survey to help
    strengthen the skills  of  NEPPS practitioners; and
    implementing a work plan that commits to developing
    better tools for NEPPS practitioners. (Also see OIG List
    of EPA  Top Management Challenges^)

    2. Safe Drinking Water  Information System
    (SDWIS) (Goal 2): The  Agency established  SDWIS
    to serve as the central repository for data on both the
    states' implementation of and compliance with existing
    and new drinking water regulations.  In 1998 EPA
    supported a series of data verification audits, the results
    of which pointed out serious data quality and reliability
    issues. (FY 1999 OMB candidate material weakness; declared
    an Agency weakness FY 1999.)
    Corrective Action Strategy: EPA is implementing a
data reliability action plan developed in 1999 as a multi-
step approach to improve data in SDWIS. Two
important steps completed by the end of 1999 included
(1) an industry survey analysis in which water utilities
examined and compared data  in SDWIS with the
utilities' own data, and (2) a study of the variety  of
ways that states are organized to carry out drinking water
program responsibilities  and the  effects of these
organizations on data collection. This effort laid the
groundwork for state-specific, on-site training that is
expected to enhance and improve the completeness,
accuracy, and timeliness of the data  in  SDWIS.
Completion of corrective  actions is  expected during
FY2001.
3. Water Quality Standards  (Goal 2): The Agency
must  reduce the backlog of actions to approve,
disapprove,  and promulgate water quality standards.
This backlog includes 43 water quality standards from
20 states, one territory, and six tribes that EPA has not
yet  approved or disapproved,  and 23 disapprovals  in
15 states that have not been resolved. In addition  to
the overdue  standards there is  a  backlog   of
40 Endangered Species Act consultations with 15 states
and two tribes on standards provisions that EPA has
approved. Another 16 states, three territories, and eight
tribes  have not completed triennial reviews in the past
3 years as  required by the Clean Water Act. EPA
identified these backlogs through routine reporting and
program reviews and is concerned that  without
corrective action the backlogs may grow  (Declared  an
internal Agency weakness FY 1999.)

    Corrective Action Strategy: EPA is employing a two-
tiered strategy in  an effort to eliminate  the  existing
backlog. In the short term EPA is giving high priority
to resolving  the outstanding disapprovals and
unreviewed standards. EPA made considerable progress
in FY 2000, reducing both the number of outstanding
disapprovals and the number of unreviewed standards.
In the longer term the Agency is working to identify
and eliminate the problems that have led to the backlogs
and other concerns. Completion of corrective actions
is expected by FY 2004.

4. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Corrective Action Program (Goal 5): EPA and other
stakeholders, including GAO, have identified several
factors impeding timely and cost-effective cleanups under
III-4
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
RCRA. To address the problem, GAO recommended
that EPA devise a strategy for ensuring that cleanup
managers in EPAs regions  and states have a consistent
understanding of new approaches outlined in guidance
or  regulation and that  EPA oversee  program
implementation to determine whether cleanup managers
are using the new approaches appropriately. (FY 1999
GAO major management challenge; declared an internal Agency
weakness FY 1999.)

    Corrective Action Strategy:  EPA  has  already
undertaken a number  of regulatory,  guidance, and
oversight initiatives consistent with GAO's suggestions.
A number of additional actions  are planned for the
near future and the long term, including providing new
results-oriented cleanup guidance with clear objectives;
encouraging maximum use of program flexibility and
practical approaches through training, outreach, and
new uses  of enforcement tools; and enhancing
community involvement and greater public access to
information on cleanup  progress. Completion  of
corrective actions is expected by FY 2001.

5. Superfund 5-Year  Reviews (Goal 5): Without
timely and adequate 5-year reviews Congress and the
public are not assured of the continued effectiveness
of  remedial actions at  sites where waste left on site
exceeds that allowed  for unlimited  use  of and
unrestricted exposure to land where cleanups took place.
(FY 1999 OIG major management issue; declared an internal
Agency weakness FY 1999.)
    Corrective Action Strategy: During the first quarter
of  FY 2000 EPA established  the Superfund
Consolidated Accomplishments Plan (SCAP), which
targeted for completion  92 5-year reviews due in
FY 2000 and 46 of the backlogged 5-year reviews (one-
third of the backlog) for a total of 138 reviews. A total
of 183 5-year reviews were completed that included 75
reviews  due in FY 2000, 69 backlogged reviews, and
39  additional regional reviews.  A total of 86 reviews
(17 from FY 2000  and 69 of the remaining backlog)
are still overdue and are targeted for completion during
FY 2001 and 2002, alongwith the reviews due for each
year. Completion of corrective actions is expected by
FY 2002. (Also see  OIG List of EPA Top Management
Challenges^)

6. Superfund Independent Government Cost
Estimates (IGCEs) (Goal 5): GAO believes that EPA
is too reliant on contractors' own cost estimates and
definitions of work in providing cost-reimbursable work
to the Agency. (FY 1997 and 1999 GAO major management
challenge; declared an internal Agency weakness FY 1997.)
    Corrective Action Strategy: The Agency established
a national IGCE workgroup to develop and implement
corrective actions to address this issue. The U.S. Army
Corps  of Engineers conducted in-depth reviews of
IGCEs in every EPA region and issued its final report
in December 1999, which identified problems  and
guidance  needed. Additional actions taken include
sharing best practices for preparing IGCEs and lessons
learned, providing additional training to personnel who
prepare IGCEs, expanding the review of IGCEs during
regional contract reviews, expanding the use of regional
databases to provide historical data to be used in IGCE
preparation, and standardizing statements of work and
baselines for recurring activities. EPA  and GAO agree
that the Agency should monitor the corrective actions
closely and keep IGCEs a high priority. Completion of
corrective actions is expected in FY 2001.
7. Superfund Remedial Action Contracts  (Goal 5):
Routine contract oversight and monitoring activities
have found that the percentage of total contract costs
expended for program management  under response
action  contracts (RACs) may be too  high.  (FY 1997
GAO major management challenge; declared an internal Agency
weakness FY 1997.)

    Corrective Action Strategy:  During FY  2000 the
Agency continued to take significant steps to increase
the capacity utilization of  RACs and to contain and
minimize program management costs. The most recent
quarterly report for actual costs through September 2000
shows  that the overall national program management
percentage has been reduced to 6.9 percent.  This
represents a dramatic decrease from September 1999,
when the national program management percentage
stood  at  14.6 percent, and reflects the Agency's
continuing efforts to monitor closely and reduce RAC
program  management costs. Completion of corrective
actions is expected by FY 2002.
8. Great Lakes Program (Goal 6): The U.S.-Canada
Great  Lakes Quality Agreement calls for Lakewide
Management Plans (LaMPs)  and Remedial Action Plans
(RAPs) to support the restoration and maintenance of
the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Great
Lakes. At the Agency's request OIG evaluated the Great
Lakes Program to provide advice and assistance on how
to improve the LaMP and RAP processes and develop
I
I
&
E.
I"
                                                                  FY 2000 Management Accomplishments and Challenges
                                                                                                       III-5

-------
    and implement effective national strategies and agreements.
    (FY1999 OIG major management challenge.)

       Corrective Action Strategy: Agency progress over the
    past year included implementing a tracking system to
    address the issues, re-instituting the Great Lakes U.S.
    Policy Committee to increase attention to RAP issues,
    and drafting a Great Lakes Strategy that emphasizes
    goals and measures.  In addition the Agency and its
    partners issued LaMPs for each lake in April 2000. EPA
    will continue to respond to the need to accelerate RAP
    progress and complete the  Great Lakes Strategy. (Also
    see OIG Ust of EPA Top Management Challenges^)

    9. Data Management Practices (Goal 7): EPA needs
    to i  rove the management,  comprehensiveness,
    consistency, reliability, and accuracy of its data to help
    better measure performance and achieve environmental
    results. In addition, EPA needs to develop error
    detection processes  to ensure that errors in Agency
    databases are addressed appropriately and in a timely
    and documented fashion. EPA broadened  the scope
    of an  existing internal Agency data management
    weakness, consolidating Agency efforts to address the
    multiplicity  of  issues  related  to  information
    management,  data accuracy, and error correction.
    (FY 1998-1999 GAO andOIG major management challenge;
    FY'2000 GAO, OMB, and OIG major management challenge;
    IBM data management declared an Agency weakness FY 1994;
    scope of weakness expanded FY 2000.)
       Corrective Action Strategy: EPA is working internally
    and in partnership with the states to improve  data
    management, comprehensiveness,  consistency,
    reliability,  and accuracy  for better performance
    measurement and achievement of environmental
    results.  EPA,  states, and  tribes  formed  the
    Environmental Data Standards Council to promote
    further development and implementation of data
    standards. Work is under way to develop standards for
    permitting, enforcement and compliance, tribal
    identifiers, and geolocational data that are expected to
    be approved in FY2001. All six  data standards that
    EPA adopted previously are now being implemented,
    as appropriate, in Agency information systems, and EPA
    has engaged the managers of scores of data  systems in
    helping to develop implementation plans. The systems
    are at varying stages of standards implementation, but
    all of the thirteen major data systems have completed
    implementation of at least one of the six data standards,
    and at  least one system has implemented  all  of the
applicable standards. In addition, as part of its
environmental information integration effort, EPA
developed a 5-year Integration Management Plan that
includes a series of planning documents and specific
actions.

    To further achievement of shared Agency-state
objectives for improving data management integration,
EPA collaborated with the states to develop a Network
Blueprint that outlines the plans  and components
required to establish  a national network for data
exchange of  environmental information and defines
how it will operate. The  components include data
standards, data exchange  templates, trading partner
agreements, a central data exchange infrastructure,  a
Facility Registry System, and other data registries. EPA
is  also working to expand implementation of its
Integrated  Error Correction Process, developed in
July 2000.  Since that  time,  195 errors have been
reported, of which 78 have been resolved. (The
reporting or allegation of an error does not imply that
it is an error. In fact almost 100 data points reported as
errors have been investigated and found to be correct.)
EPA is also developing a Data Quality Strategic Plan to
improve the quality and reliability  of  environmental
data, as well as an Agency-wide Enterprise Architecture
that will guide the creation  and revision of EPA's
programmatic and regional information systems. The
Agency anticipates that all corrective  actions will be
completed by the end of FY 2002. (Also see OIG Ust of
EPA Top Management Challenges^)

 10. Laboratory Quality System Practices (Goal 7):
Through internal reviews and OIG investigations, the
Agency has found management control weaknesses and
some cases of misconduct in  laboratories concerning
data quality that could impact  environmental and
enforcement decisions. (FY 1999—2000 OIG major
management challenge; declared an internal Agency weakness
FY'2000.)

    Corrective Action  Strategy:   EPA completed
independent technical  reviews  of its regional
laboratories in FY 2000 to assess the Agency's ability
to produce data of known and documented quality. The
Agency will  complete reviews of the remaining
laboratories by the end of  FY 2001. Ongoing actions
include  assembling a workgroup consisting of both
EPA and non-EPA members that will (1) identify
weaknesses in laboratory quality systems that produce
analytical data used for Agency decision making; (2)
III-6
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
establish methods to detect and deter misconduct in
labs; and (3) promote best practices in laboratory
performance, documentation, and implementation. In
addition each EPA organization will be responsible for
establishing  management controls  to  ensure that
environmental measurement  data supplied by
laboratories is of known and documented quality. This
effort  includes monitoring and oversight of the
development and implementation of Agency-approved
quality systems by third parties.  Completion  of
corrective actions is expected by December 2003. (Also
see OIG Ust of EPA Top Management Challenges^)

11. Results-Based Information Technology Project
Management (Goal 7): EPA and its partners need to
plan strategically for implementing a common data
architecture, data standards, geospatial information, and
one-stop electronic  reporting in order to  share
environmental information with EPAs diverse partners
and stakeholders and facilitate environmental protection
efforts.  In addition  the Agency needs to ensure that
information  technology projects are timely, cost-
effective, and  results—based. (FY 2001  OIG major
management challenge.)

    Corrective Action Strategy: EPA has already begun
to address  the systemic issues of information
technology project planning and management. For
example EPAs environmental information integration
effort provides a new  approach to state-data
relationships and new technologies. Over the next few
years EPA plans to develop a more robust and rigorous
program to  meet the  architectural and investment
management requirements of the Clinger—Cohen Act.
As part of this effort EPA plans to expand its project
management  review criteria for projects with annual
costs greater than $1 million or more than $5 million
over the life-cycle of  the system to ensure greater
accountability and capability to produce results.  (Also
see OIG Ust of EPA Top Management Challenges^)

12. Reinventing Environmental Regulation (Goal
8): In January 1999 GAO reported that EPAs current
regulatory system is costly and occasionally inflexible
and that the Agency faces challenges in making changes
to the current system. These challenges include helping
employees understand and support changes and
reaching consensus among stakeholders on objectives
and approaches for  addressing important reinvention
issues  and policies.  (FY 1999-2000 GAO  major
management challenge.)
    Corrective Action Strategy: Efforts are under way to
achieve better environmental results with less burden
through the use of innovative and flexible approaches.
Actions taken to date include:
•   Reorganizing the Agency's policy and reinvention
    staff into  one  organization  focusing  on
    innovation, economic analysis, and support for
    business   and  community  environmental
    approaches.
•   Building Agency c ap acity for evaluating innovative
    policies and approaches.
•   Finalizing 50 Project XL (eXcellence and Leadership)
    agreements, continuing follow-through on XL and
    state innovation  projects, and  implementing  an
    annual cycle of evaluation for Project XL pilots.
•   Initiating the Performance Track Program  to
    recognize high-performance companies.
•   Establishing regular forums and networks with
    small businesses and industrial sectors.

13. Permit Compliance System  (PCS)  (Goal 9):
OMB believes that, because of missing data and data
quality problems, PCS is not  a reliable  source  of
information for the management and oversight of the
Clean Water Act NPDES program. (FY 1999  OMB
candidate material weakness; declared an internal Agency
weakness FY 1999.)

    Corrective Action Strategy:  EPA has been aware of
problems with PCS and, over the past few years, has
worked with the states to identify problems and define
the systems revisions needed for effective NPDES
program management and oversight.  In conjunction
with the states, EPA has three major initiatives under
way that are intended to improve the usefulness of the
system as a management tool:  PCS modernization,
interim data exchange format, and electronic reporting.
EPA is monitoring progress carefully and will gauge
success by the level of state participation, improvements
in the quality and comprehensiveness of the data, and
reliability of the analyses generated.  Completion  of
corrective actions is expected by FY 2003.
14. Accountability (Goal 10): OIG  describes this
major management challenge broadly to encompass the
Agency's planning, budgeting, and accountability
functions overall and points specifically to issues related
to managerial cost accounting, performance partnership
agreements, and the Great Lakes Program. (FY 1997-
2000 OIG major management challenge.)
I
I
&
E.
I"
                                                                  FY 2000 Management Accomplishments and Challenges
                                                                                                       III-7

-------
        Corrective Action Strategy: EPA has made significant
    progress over the past few years in strengthening results-
    based management, including development of a goal-
    based budget and planning and accountability functions
    to support  it. In  FY 2000 EPA issued  its  revised
    Strategic Plan for  FY 2000-2005 that reflects lessons
    learned about performance measurement and Agency
    priorities for protecting the environment and human
    health, improved performance measures to reflect better
    programmatic  and environmental outcomes, and
    strengthened cost accounting to link  more clearly
    Agency budgetary  resources with the achievement of
    environmental results.  It must nevertheless be kept in
    mind that the resources identified with a particular
    environmental outcome will rarely, if ever, fully capture
    the relevant costs. For example, the  Great Lakes
    program benefits greatly from work done  in other
    programs, including overall water quality protection and
    the acid  rain program.  Since resources  cannot be
    double-counted, such  omissions  are inevitable. (Also
    see OIG Fist of EPA Top Management Challenges^)
    15. Agency Process for  Preparing Financial
    Statements (Goal 10): According to OIG, EPAs
    process for preparing financial statements needs
    improvement to enable the Agency to submit audited
    financial statements by March 1 of each year. (FY 1999—
    2000 OIG major management challenge; declared an internal
    Agency weakness FY 1999.)

        Corrective Action Strategy:  In an effort to deliver
    timely financial statements  and obtain clean  audit
    opinions  by  March 1,  2001, EPA has issued policies
    and procedures on the Agency's financial statement
    preparation process, prepared interim financial
    statements,  reached agreement with  OIG on the
    timeline for key milestones, established formal controls
    with OIG to address audit questions  and adjustments,
    and provided technical training to staff responsible for
    financial statements. In  addition, the  Agency is
    examining options for automating the preparation of
    statements.  Completion  of corrective  actions is
    expected in FY 2001, and OIG has issued an unqualified
    opinion on the Agency's FY 2000 statements.

    16. Managerial Cost Accounting  (Goal 10): OIG
    believes that EPA needs to improve its cost accounting
    systems and processes to provide Agency managers with
    timely and reliable information on the cost  of carrying
    out EPAs programs and administrative activities. In the
    Agency's FY 1999 financial  statement audit,  OIG
reported that EPA did not comply with the Managerial
Cost Accounting Standard requirements  to  (1)
determine the full cost of its activities, (2) accumulate
and report on a regular basis the cost of activities for
management information  and other  stakeholder
purposes, and (3) use appropriate costing methodologies
to accumulate and assign costs to outputs. (FY 2000
OIG major management challenge.)
    Corrective Action Strategy:  EPA  believes  that it
substantially complies with the Managerial Cost
Accounting Standards.  Since FY 1999 all new
obligational authority has been budgeted and accounted
for in the Agency's GPRA 10-goal structure using a
Program Results Code  (PRC). The PRC provides  the
structure whereby all the costs that benefit the activities
in a particular goal and objective, regardless of national
program manager or program office, are accumulated
to show the cost of the Agency's outputs. Some indirect
costs are  accumulated in  distribution accounts and
allocated to the appropriate PRC. Obligations made
before FY 1999 are accounted for in the old program
element structure. Cost information from both
accounting structures is available for use by managers
to review how resources are spent to achieve expected
results  and to  help them make future budgeting
decisions.
    Cost accounting is a process that will continue to
evolve as a result of on  going improvements and
enhancements. EPA has taken a number of actions and
has planned others to  strengthen cost accounting
further.  The Agency has:
•   Linked resources in the Annual Plan and Budget
    with the GPRA  goal  structure, beginning with
    FY  1999.
•   Issued policy and guidance and provided training
    on budget restructuring and cost accounting.
•   Issued Superfund indirect cost  rates that comply
    with the Managerial Cost Accounting Standards.
•   Issued the FY 2000 Statement of Net Costs by goal
    in the Agency's Annual Financial Statements.
    The Agency is currently:
•   Developing reports on outputs that combine both
    the old and  new structure.
•   Workingwith individual program offices to address
    specific accounting needs.
III-8
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
•   Assisting programs in developing indirect costs for
    user fees.
    (Also see OIG Ust of EPA Top Management Challenges^)

17.  Improved Management  of  Assistance
Agreements (Goal 10):OIG audits have found that
EPA needs to validate the effectiveness of its strategy
for ensuring effective  management of  its assistance
agreements. (FY 2000  OIG  major management challenge;
grants closeout and oversight of assistance agreements was declared
a material weakness inFY 1996, reported substantially corrected
in FY 1999 and redesignated as an internal Agency weakness;
grants closeout was corrected in FY 2000; and improved
management of assistance  agreements was declared an internal
Agency weakness in FY 2000.)

    Corrective Action Strategy: The Agency closed the
grants  closeout portion of this weakness in FY 2000,
reporting that all but 26 grants of the estimated backlog
of 19,000 reported to Congress in July 1996 were closed.
Twenty-four of the remaining 26 grants will be closed
out as the Agency resolves an outstanding indirect cost
rate issue. The remaining two grants will be closed out
as  the Agency completes the audit resolution process.
To manage grant closeouts more  efficiently,  EPA has
established interim closeout goals for each year. Each
Grants Management  Office submitted its FY 2000
grants  closeout  strategy as  required. In addition the
Agency developed and implemented policies to ensure
effective post-award management of EPA assistance
agreements.
    During FY 2001 EPA  will assess  whether  the
Agency manages its assistance agreements appropriately,
both  administratively and programmatically. The
Agency will examine quarterly reports and information
from the Grantee Compliance Assistance Database;
conduct evaluations of  Management Effectiveness
Reviews, post-award plans, and the Grantee Compliance
Assistance Initiative; and consult with Senior Resource
Officials in conducting the assessments and with OIG
to validate corrective actions. Completion of corrective
actions is expected by FY 2002. (Also see  OIG Ust of
EPA Top Management Challenges.)
18. Human Capital Strategy Implementation (Goal
10): EPA must devote considerable attention to building
a workforce with the highly specialized skills and
knowledge required to accomplish the Agency's work
or risk seriously weakening its ability to fulfill even the
most basic of  its  legal, regulatory, and fiduciary
responsibilities. With its Human Capital Strategic Plan
in place, the Agency has a blueprint for the initial and
longer-term steps needed to begin addressing this
impending weakness.  (FY 1998-1999 OIG  major
management challenge; FY 2000 GAO and OIG  major
management challenge; declared an internal Agency weakness
FY2000.)
    Corrective Action Strategy:  The Agency's workforce
planning efforts call for identifying the skills needed in
every program unit based on an assessment of future
program needs, determining the gap between  those
needs and the  current state, and tying those needs  to
future budget development. Developmental programs
aimed at support staff, mid-level professionals,
managers, and the Senior Executive Service (SES) are
being implemented or are in final design. The first SES
Candidate Development Program to be offered in more
than a decade will begin this spring. Completion  of
corrective actions is expected by FY 2003. (Also see OIG
Ust of EPA Top Management Challenges^)
19.  Performance Partnership Grants (PPG) (Goal
10): During regional audits on PPGs, OIG found that
(1) Agency officials had difficulty determining how  to
provide flexibility while  ensuring  accountability for
performance and environmental results; (2) some PPGs
did not include quantifiable, verifiable, measurable, and
time-specific measures; and  (3) some PPGs included
activity-based  measures  rather than outcome-based
measures. OIG concluded that EPA and states have
not been able to redirect scarce resources to improving
environmental results and that the lack of goals and
performance  measures contributed to the  poor
integration of NEPPS.  OIG believes that greater
integration and acceptance of NEPPS in the Agency,
combined with meaningful performance measurement,
would result in rapid environmental improvements.
(FY 1997 OIG issue addressed as part of management challenge
on accountability^)
    Corrective Action  Strategy:   Following  the
promulgation  of regulations to establish the  PPG
program for  states and to add a new regulation
specifically for Indian tribes, EPA is working  to
implement and provide training on the state and tribal
PPG regulations. The Agency anticipates publishing the
final rules in FY 2001, pending concurrence from OMB.
In addition EPA will include PPGs in its administrative
Management  Oversight Reviews. Completion  of
corrective actions is expected in FY 2001.
I
I
&
E.
I"
            FY 2000 Management Accomplishments and Challenges
                                                  III-9

-------
                                  MANAGEMENT'S REPORT ON AUDITS
        During FY 2000 EPA made significant progress in
    reducing the number of audits without final action as
    well as strengthening its  audit management practices
    Agency-wide.  EPA reduced the number of audits
    without final action after 1 year by 35 percent, from 62
    in FY 1999  to 40 in FY 2000. Overall, EPA was
    responsible for addressing OIG recommendations and
    tracking follow-up activities on 503 audits in FY 2000.
    The Agency achieved final action on more than half
    of these audits within 1 year.
        In addition to strengthening Agency-wide audit
    follow-up activities for promptly addressing audit issues,
    EPA began to develop a new web-based system to
    improve its efficiency in audit management practices.
    The Agency plans to implement the  new system in
    FY 2001. EPA continues to work with OIG and senior
    managers to  emphasize the importance of timely and
    effective audit management practices. Following is a
summary of the Agency's audit management activities
for FY 2000.
Final Action Taken: EPA achieved final action on
32 performance audits and 244 financial audits. Of the
244 financial audits, OIG questioned costs of more
than $59.6 million. After careful review OIG and the
Agency together agreed to disallow $29.8 million of
these  questioned  costs.  For  this period EPA
management and OIG did not identify audits for which
resources could be better utilized (that is, put to better
use) based on findings in a performance audit.
Final Action Not Taken: As of September 30, 2000,
227 audits were without final action (excluding those audits
with management decisions under administrative appeal
by the grantee). Of these 227 audits, EPA officials had
not completed final action on 40 audits (18 percent) within
1 year after the management decision.
                             DISALLOWED COSTS AND FUNDS PUT TO BETTER USE


Category
Audits with management decisions but without final
action at the beginning of FY 20001
Audits for which management decisions were
reached in FY 2000
Total audits pending final action during FY 2000
Final action taken during FY 2000:
(i) Recoveries
a) Offsets
b) Collection
c) Value of Property
d) Other
(11) Write-Offs
(iii) Reinstated Through Grantee Appeal
(iv) Value of recommendations completed
(v) Value of recommendations management decided
should/could not be completed
Audits without final action at end of FY 2000
Disallowed Cost
(Financial Audits)
Number

196

228
424
244










180
Value

$ 166,793,646

$ 23,263,486
$190,057,132
$ 29,811,957

$ 18,182,932
$ 4,142,067
$ 0
$ 191,000
$ 5,375,496
$ 1,920,462



$ 160,245,175
Better Use
(Performance Audits)
Number

57

22
79
32










47
Value

$0

$0
$0
$0







$0

$0
$0
1 Differences in number of reports and amounts of disallowed costs and funds put to better use between this report and our previous semiannual report result
from adjustments made to follow-up data in the tracking system.
III-10
        FEPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
Audits Awaiting  Decision on  Appeal: EPA
regulations  allow grantees  to  appeal management
decisions on  financial assistance audits that seek
monetary reimbursement from the recipient. In the case
of an appeal, EPA must not take action to collect the
account receivable until the Agency issues a decision
on the appeal. As of September 30, 2000, there were
74 management decisions in administrative appeal
status.

Audits Pending Final Action Beyond 1 Year: Due to
the complexity of the issues, Agency management often
requires longer than 1 year to complete corrective action
on audits conducted by OIG. Beginning October 1,2000
management will  track 40 audits with outstanding
corrective actions after the 1-year period. These audits are
discussed below by category—contracts, single  audits,
assistance agreements and program performance—and
identified by title and responsible office.
    Contracts: Final action for contract audits occurs
when the contract  is  awarded, the solicitation is
canceled, repayments to EPA are received, or corrective
actions are implemented. EPA is tracking completion
of one audit taking longer than 1 year to complete.

Office of Acquisition Management:
10040   CMC, Inc.
    Single: Single audits are those that affect nonprofit
organizations, universities, and state and local governments.
Final action for single audits occurs when nonmonetary
compliance actions are completed. This process may take
longer than 1 year to implement if the findings are complex
or if the grantee does not have the resources to take
corrective action. EPA is tracking completion of corrective
actions on three single audits.
Region 9:
85018   Arizona
85053   Colorado River Indian Tribes, Arizona
85059   Colorado River Indian Tribes, Arizona
    Assistance Agreements: Final action for assistance
agreement audits occurs when all corrective actions have
been implemented. Final action may take longer than a
year because the grantee may appeal, refuse to repay,
or be placed on a repayment plan that spans several
years. EPA  is  tracking 11 audits with financial or
associated corrective actions  taking longer than 1 year
to complete.
Region 3:
12023   Bath County Service Authority
20207   Center for Environment,
        Commerce Engineering
Region 4:
73023   Atlanta, Georgia
Region 7:
13038   Metro St. Louis Sewer District
Region 5:
13084   Strongsville, Ohio
13115   Gallon, Ohio
14038   Gary, Indiana
14042   Cass County, Michigan
14047   Indianapolis, Indiana
24077   Gary, Indiana
34038   Flint, Michigan
    Program Performance: Program  performance
audits include reviews of Agency programs and audits
of EPAs financial statements. Final action for program
performance audits occurs when all corrective actions
have been implemented. This process may take longer
than 1 year when corrections are complex and lengthy.
EPA is tracking 25 audits in this category.
Office of  the Administrator:
61301   Environmental Education
71277   Regional Labs Office of
        Environmental Information:
51240   PCIE Application Maintenance
81240   Field Sampling Capping Report
Office of  the Chief Financial  Officer:
21660   Superfund FY91 Trust Fund
81058   FY 1997 Financial Statement
81166   FY 1997 Financial Statement

Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances:
11378   Pesticides Inerts
34030   Pesticides Banned (follow-up)
41205   Pesticides Theme Report
Office of  Research and Development:
P0217  Selection of Peer Reviewers
                                                                   FY 2000 Management Accomplishments and Challenges
                                                                                                       III-ll

-------
    Office of Water:
    71142   Animal Waste Disposal Issues
    71223   Mining Financial Assurance
    Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response:
    51512   Manifesting Requirements
    71114   Audit of RCRA Hazardous Waste Data
    71132   Lab Data Quality - Federal Facilities
    81090   Replacement Housing
    81234   Audit of Deferrals to States
    Region 5:
    10058   Tribal Water Grants
    P0055   RCRA SIG Non-Compliers
    P0210   Ohio Water Quality
    P0212   GLNPO
    Region 9:
    83004    Physical Environmental
    Region 10:
    81094   Air Enforcement Program, Washington
    81252   Region X LANS
111-12    FEPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
       MAJOR MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES NEEDING HIGH-LEVEL AGENCY ATTENTION
                            (Prepared by EPA's Office of Inspector General)
ACCOUNTABILITY

    EPA's stated mission is to protect human health
and safeguard the environment. Accountability, a critical
part of the Agency's overall system, is needed for EPA
to accomplish  its mission effectively. Over the years
OIG has recommended improvements in a number of
areas that will help EPA achieve greater accountability.
However EPA  needs to take further action to develop
accountability  systems that tie performance to  the
Agency's organizational goals.
    EPA can be viewed as a business which must
endeavor to deliver high quality products and services
to its customers. To do this EPA needs to integrate its
management systems better. These systems encompass
leadership to define the Agency's mission, values,  and
products; strategic planning to establish goals  and
measures of  success; customer focus to ensure
expectations are met; management information systems
to report progress in achieving goals; streamlined work
processes; and effective human capital management.
These components should all work together so that
EPA can meet customer needs and achieve desired
environmental  and business results.

    EPA was consciously organized with ten largely
autonomous regional offices so that the Agency could
be more sensitive to local environmental concerns. With
this organizational  structure it is very important that
regional offices be held accountable for implementing
national environmental policies. Resources budgeted for
environmental  programs by EPA Headquarters should
be controlled and accounted for to ensure they are used
for designated purposes. This can be achieved through
clearly defined goals, performance measures, and areas
of responsibility; better tracking of how employees
spend their time; and greater commitment to achieving
national goals.
    EPA needs to work with its state, tribal, and federal
agency partners to identify roles and responsibilities
for carrying out environmental protection. For example,
in work on the Great Lakes Program, we found that
plans to address the Great Lakes  ecosystems would
benefit  from clarifying the organizational roles  and
responsibilities for the offices, divisions, and teams
involved. Another example is the  1998/1999 RCRA
Implementation Plan, which did not include specific
expectations  regarding basic permit program
maintenance. Clarification of roles and responsibilities
for this program would establish accountability and help
the program achieve success.

   The availability of management information also
greatly impacts accountability. EPA needs to work with
its partners to identify and agree on what data is needed
to measure the health of the environment and  assess
progress. As further discussed under the information
resources data management weakness, the Agency has
a number of ongoing activities to improve the quality
and availability of its environmental data; however, it is
unlikely EPA will have the foundation it needs to share
comparable information, monitor environmental
activities, or compare progress across the  nation in the
near future.

RESULTS-BASED  INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY PROJECT MANAGEMENT

   As the Agency looks to its future it is increasingly
apparent that EPA has not adequately  planned an
information technology (IT) infrastructure to support
an integrated approach to managing environmental
information.  To  facilitate  improvements  in
environmental protection EPA needs to provide  and
share environmental  information with its diverse
partners and stakeholders. To  achieve that goal EPA
and  its partners  need  to plan  strategically  for
implementing a common data architecture, data
standards, geospatial information, and one-stop
electronic  reporting.  Although EPA has initiated
numerous IT projects  in recent  years, they were not
evaluated  to assess  how they support the Agency's
programmatic and operational goals. In the last 2 fiscal
years, EPA has dedicated approximately  $822 million
to IT projects. The Agency expects it will spend at least
$472 million in FY 2001. To ensure projects are timely,
cost  effective, and results-based, it is imperative that
EPA better plans, develops, approves, and manages its
IT projects.

   We have significant concerns regarding the current
structure of EPA's investment process and the Agency's
ability  to track IT development  and implementation
I
I
                                                                 FY 2000 Management Accomplishments and Challenges
                                                                                                    111-13

-------
S3
W
"8
3
effectively.  For several years EPA has attempted to
address these problems but has been unable to craft an
adequate project management process for IT capital
investments that will enable the Agency to support its
environmental mission. Instead EPA appears to have
an evolving approach to integrating information using
existing IT projects, which in themselves have not
incorporated reasonable project management controls.
This approach has resulted in many stops and starts
over the last several years and does not meet the intent
of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996. The Act requires a
comprehensive approach to capital planning and a
disciplined budget process for managing a portfolio of
assets to meet Agency goals and objectives.
    Our concerns  regarding the lack of IT project
management at EPA are echoed in the special report,
Federal Agency Compliance with the Clinger-Cohen Act, issued
by the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee. This
report noted that EPA could produce no evidence of
mission-related reviews or assessments regarding IT
projects that discussed programmatic or  operational
goals.  EPA's own 1999 analysis of 49 major IT
investment  proposals found that:
•   Project milestones were too general, non-
    measurable, and not tied to key life-cycle milestones.
•   Projects were  still being planned, developed, and
    managed in a stovepipe fashion.
•   EPA had not established Agency-wide priorities for
    IT  investments.
•   EPA's  Information Resources Management
    Strategic Plan was  outdated and did not track with
    the Results Act.
    EPA created  the Office of  Environmental
Information (OEI) 2  years ago to consolidate many
information technology operations. While well-
intentioned, OEI  has not formalized a long-term
implementation strategy for providing the Agency with
a multimedia  approach  to accomplish  its  various
programmatic missions.

DATA  MANAGEMENT

    Audits  of  EPA programmatic areas  often cover
areas relating to  environmental data information
systems, and we frequently find deficiencies within these
systems. States  have developed information  systems
based on the information they need to support their
environmental programs. EPA  and the  states  often
apply different data definitions within their respective
information systems and sometimes collect and input
different data.  As a result states  and EPA report
inconsistent data and often have difficulty sharing
comparable information. EPA has attempted to address
data quality issues such as data gaps, but, to  date, has
not produced an approved action plan. Consequently
EPA may not have the environmental data it needs to
monitor environmental activities or compare progress
across the nation.
    For many years EPA has  acknowledged  data
management as an internal  Agency weakness. In
particular it has recognized the need to implement (1)
a data architecture, (2) data standards, and (3)  data
administration functions to share environmental data
Agency-wide and with EPA's partners and stakeholders.
Developing  a data management program has been a
complex effort and, consequently,  corrective  action
dates have been extended several  times  since the
problem was first reported in  1994. The Agency's
estimated date to correct this Agency weakness is now
FY 2002.

    Several areas remain to be addressed. First EPA
committed to publish a data architecture by December
1996. The Agency stated that it completed the corrective
action in May 1999, but it has been unable to produce
evidence of  a publication for our review Second EPA
initiated action to promulgate six data standards by June
1996. Although the  standards  have been  formally
approved, they have not been  implemented in the
Agency's major environmental  systems. Third EPA
agreed to revise policies and procedures by March 1997,
and although this action was reported complete in May
1999, the revised policies have not been  approved or
implemented. Using the data standards  and revised
procedures, EPA stated that a functioning management
structure would be operational  by  September  1998.
EPA's Environmental Data Registry and Facility Registry
System (FRS) were to form the backbone of the
management structure. However it will  be  FY 2001
before FRS is fully loaded and functioning.

    In 1999 EPA formed OEI to increase the value of
environmental  information for all  stakeholders by
systematically improving interagency  data sharing, as
well as the accuracy, reliability, and scientific basis of
environmental information. The Administrator also
established an Information Integration Initiative (1-3)
111-14
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
focused on establishing a single integrated multimedia
core of environmental data and tools. After 1 year the
1-3 project still does not have an approved action plan
to coordinate current and future efforts.
    OEI recognizes that much  needs to be done to
realize EPA's vision of integrated, quality environmental
information  and expects to develop a long-term
approach and implementation schedule for improving
the quality and reliability of the Agency's environmental
data. To that  end OEI will continue to develop data
management  policies and procedures and work on
promulgating existing data standards. Moreover,
through the recently-established Environmental Data
Standards Council, EPA will work with states and tribes
to identify and develop the next  set of data standards.
OEI  is also  continuing to develop  and expand
implementation of its integrated error correction
process  to improve the reliability of collected
environmental data.  Finally, in FY 2000, EPA began to
plan a comprehensive data exchange network which,
through the use of current technology, will provide a
wide range of shared information among EPA, states,
tribes, localities, the regulated community, and other
data partners.

    Although the Agency is moving in  the right
direction, it has not developed an overall strategy to
address the integration, quality, and management of its
environmental data. To help the Agency achieve success
in these endeavors, we shared thoughts with EPA's Chief
Information Officer regarding the Agency's strategy and
planned activities  for 1-3 and the proposed exchange
network. At this point it is unlikely that EPA will have
the  foundation  it needs  to  share  comparable
information, monitor environmental  activities,  or
compare progress across the nation within the  near
future. Moreover EPA's ability to evaluate the outcomes
of its programs in terms of environmental changes will
continue to be limited by gaps and inconsistencies in
the quality of its data.

MANAGERIAL ACCOUNTING

    During the audit  of the  FY 1999  financial
statements we reported that the Office of the Chief
Financial Officer (OCFO) needed to further improve
its systems and processes to increase the accuracy,
reliability, and usefulness of financial information used
to prepare the financial statements and to manage EPA's
environmental programs and administrative activities.
Because of Agency process problems, reliable FY 1999
financial statements were not prepared to enable an
unqualified audit opinion by March 1, the date required
by the  Government  Management  Reform Act.
Although EPA improved its  financial preparation
processes over prior years, the financial  statements
provided for FY 1999 were incomplete, contained
significant errors,  and were received late. The Agency
has recently made  some process improvements. OIG's
assessment of the impact of  the improvements on
EPA's financial reporting capabilities will not be
completed until late February 2001.
   EPA has been recognized as a leader in developing
a goals-based budget aligned with its programmatic and
operational outputs and outcomes. EPA needs to follow
through and improve its cost accounting systems and
processes, so Agency managers have timely and reliable
information on the cost of carrying out EPA's programs
and  administrative activities.  The  lack  of cost
information adversely impacts nearly  every  facet of
EPA's operations,  from budget formulation and
planning, to program execution and evaluation, to the
recovery of EPA's costs to provide services to others.
During  the  FY 1999  financial statement audit we
reported that EPA did not comply with the Managerial
Cost Accounting  Standard  requirements to  (1)
determine the full cost of its activities,  (2) accumulate
and report the cost of activities on a regular basis for
management  information and other stakeholder
purposes, and (3)  always use appropriate  costing
methodologies to accumulate and assign cost to outputs.
We also plan to report this noncompliance for FY 2000.
OCFO  disagrees  that its cost accounting system is
noncompliant with the required standard, but agrees
that improvements should be made to the system over
time.

   A critical component of a good cost accounting
system is the indirect cost rate. An Agency-wide indirect
cost  policy is needed to help ensure that direct and
indirect  costs are  consistently  identified for inclusion
in determining the  full cost of conducting  Agency
programs and activities, including cost per output. EPA's
indirect  cost policy should identify what costs should
be included to recover full cost when determining user
fees for programs that receive fees for services provided
by EPA  and when developing billing rates for work
EPA performs for other government agencies.
I
I
                                                                  FY 2000 Management Accomplishments and Challenges
                                                                                                      111-15

-------
S3
W
"8
3
    Although progress has been made in developing
and implementing cost accounting procedures, more
needs to be done. Strong leadership from OCFO and a
commitment by all Agency offices is needed for EPA
to have systems  and procedures  in place to provide
useful, consistent, timely, and reliable information about
the cost of EPA's programs and  outputs. Agency
managers need cost data integrated with program
information to make the best decisions about how to
use available resources to maximize environmental
results.  For example, with information  about the
transactional cost of various approaches to achieving
an environmental outcome, Agency managers could
make comparisons and select the most cost-effective
approach to achieving the desired environmental result.
The  development of  sound cost  accounting
information will also promote greater accountability
within the Agency.

EMPLOYEE COMPETENCIES

    The Agency recognizes one of its biggest challenges
over the next several years is the development and
implementation of a workforce planning strategy that
focuses its attention and resources  on employee
development. Appropriate training for staff, including
supervisors and managers, is critical to accomplishing
EPA's environmental mission. The need for training is
highlighted in a number of OIG audit reports.
    In an audit of the Superfund program, we reported
that the Headquarters program office and several EPA
regions did not clearly identify the  quality  assurance
training needs of program staff. Even in regions where
training needs were  identified, the training was not
always provided. Also audits have repeatedly noted a
need to better train managers in their oversight and
administration  of EPA's  assistance  agreements
programs. As a third example we  found that EPA
employees  in the hazardous waste program needed
more rigorous training to calculate proposed penalties
against violating facilities.
    NEPPS is a major EPA-state program. We found
that a lack of training for EPA employees has hindered
the effective implementation of NEPPS. This training
is important because  the  NEPPS  program  is
fundamentally different from traditional EPA programs
in that it allows the states greater flexibility in achieving
environmental results. Therefore it is critical that EPA
and  the  states work closely together to agree on
expectations and measurements.
   EPA also  recognizes the need for broader
management and leadership skills. This need is clearly
expressed in the Workforce Assessment Project that reported
on the implications of future changes in EPA's mission
and  role in environmental protection. The study
identified competency gaps that EPA must close to
ensure its  workforce can meet existing and new
challenges. GAO also reported EPA's need to develop
and  implement a workforce planning strategy. EPA
drafted  a Human Capital Strategic  Plan.  EPA's
workforce planning efforts call for identifying the skills
needed in every program unit based on the Agency's
assessment of future program needs, identifying skill
gaps, and tying skill needs to  future budget requests.
The  Agency needs to make a commitment to deploy
the  strategy by dedicating resources, developing
performance measures, and implementing necessary
systems.

QUALITY  OF LABORATORY DATA

   High quality scientific  analysis is critical  to the
accomplishment of EPA's mission. The quality of some
scientific analyses generated by EPA and contract
laboratories is questionable and should not be used to
support environmental decisions. Our reviews disclosed
weaknesses and fraud in laboratory management
practices resulting in data quality and integrity problems
that impact environmental and enforcement decisions.
   EPA  relies on the testing data provided by contract
laboratories to assess threats to public health and the
environment  and to  determine where  and when
remedial action is needed. In September 2000 employees
at one EPA contract laboratory were indicted for
falsifying data involving sample analyses for several EPA
program  areas including Superfund, RCRA, NPDES,
air toxics, and pesticides. At another contract laboratory
key employees were convicted for falsely certifying that
gas chromatograph/mass spectrometer analyses on
samples taken from hazardous waste sites nationwide
complied with all EPA contract requirements. EPA is
spending significant resources to determine the impact
of fraudulent analyses on environmental  and
enforcement decisions.
   OIG work at an EPA laboratory disclosed several
problems with the quality of analytical results and chain
111-16
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
of custody procedures. An internal EPA review also
identified numerous weaknesses in laboratory
management practices. OIG recommended various
actions for improving management, accountability, and
oversight of the laboratory, including independent
technical reviews. The Agency has responded to these
recommendations and deployed technical review teams
around the country. The Agency also plans to take long-
term measures to ensure management controls are in
place to assure that  environmental data generated by
both EPA and non-EPA laboratories meet the Agency's
quality needs and requirements.

EPA'S  INFORMATION SECURITY PROGRAM

    EPA relies on its information  systems to collect,
process, store, and disseminate  vast amounts of
information used to  assist in making sound regulatory
and program decisions.  We believe EPA  needs  a
centralized security program with strong oversight
processes to adequately address risks and ensure that
valuable IT resources and environmental data are secure.
With a decentralized wide area network that links all of
EPAs computer  systems,  even one regional  location
with an inadequate security program can make the entire
Agency vulnerable. Similarly weaknesses surrounding
EPAs key environmental and financial  systems could
jeopardize the integrity of vital data for decision making
and public use.
    We found significant and pervasive problems
regarding the adequacy of security  for EPAs  financial
systems and various regional operations. We recently
reported that controls over entry to EPAs mainframe
computer at RTP  needed strengthening.  Also in
July 2000 GAO reported serious problems with EPAs
security program and spotlighted unacceptable security
risks by penetrating numerous  systems. GAO also
reported that Agency security plans were inadequate
and added  that existing practices were largely  a
paperwork exercise that did little to mitigate risks to
Agency data and systems. In response to GAO's findings
EPA initiated a number of aggressive steps to enhance
and improve its  information security  program. For
example, the Agency temporarily shut down much of
EPA's  IT communications with its partners and
stakeholders until critical controls could be established.
    Despite many  notable actions  OEI  is  only
beginning to establish its security  oversight role for
EPAs vast information system network. Moreover OEI
is just starting to take needed steps to enhance  and
institutionalize an expanded information  security
program.  In addition, although EPA has installed
firewalls,  no final network security policies exist
regarding Agency Internet networking controls or dial-
up  access.  EPA recently developed an  Agency
Information Security Action Plan which uses a phased
approach to address  GAO and prior OIG report
recommendations. EPA expects it will take 2 years to
implement the expanded Agency security program and
to address the related action plan recommendations.
    In the interim, we believe the Agency should
continue to  concentrate resources  on this significant
weakness, ensuring that all aspects of an Agency-wide
information security program  are addressed. This
includes not only adequate  security plans, but also the
process used to develop those plans and the hardware
tools and policies that EPA must implement to enforce
security throughout  the Agency. For example
management needs formally to approve and implement
final network security policies using appropriate
firewall(s)  technology. Moreover we recommend that
EPA  thoroughly  verify the  effectiveness  of
implemented controls before concluding work in this
crucial area.

EPA'S USE OF ASSISTANCE AGREEMENTS TO
ACCOMPLISH ITS MISSION

    Assistance agreements  are the primary  vehicles
through which EPA delivers environmental and human
health protection to the public. Therefore it is important
that the Agency and the public receive what the Agency
has paid for. For many years funding of assistance
agreements has constituted approximately one-half of
the  Agency's budget.
    Agency managers have been working to  improve
their management of assistance agreements. However
our audit work continues to identify problems in the
delivery of environmental protection activities through
the  award of assistance agreements.  For example we
reported in September 2001 that EPA Region 8 was
not consistently awarding and monitoring tribal grants.
Agency  officials placed a higher priority on  external
relationships, generally with the tribes, and did not pay
sufficient attention to grant management and internal
organizational relationships. Some grants included
I
I
                                                                 FY 2000 Management Accomplishments and Challenges
                                                                                                    111-17

-------
S3
W
"8
3
unallowable activities or EPA received inadequate or
untimely work plans and progress reports from grantees.

    Recent OIG audits of EPA's assistance recipients
disclosed that some recipients did not have adequate
financial and internal controls to ensure federal funds
were managed properly. As a result EPA had limited
assurance that  assistance agreement funds were used
in accordance with workplans  and met negotiated
environmental  targets.  For example an EPA Region 5
grantee could not  adequately  account for  almost
$169,000 of the  $300,000 in EPA  funds. As another
example a Region 2 grantee had submitted multiple
financial status reports with different ending balances,
had excess federal funds on hand, and could not support
that it had met the minimum cost-sharing requirement.
Misuse of assistance agreement funds also resulted in
an agreement  with  one city to  settle a civil  lawsuit
charging that the city's air pollution control program
improperly spent a total of $429,158 in assistance
agreement funds awarded by EPA.
    The Agency has completed a number of actions to
improve  its management  controls  over assistance
agreements. OIG will  continue to  conduct audits to
determine if  systemic problems  exist in EPA's
management of assistance agreements and to work with
the Agency to identify  solutions.

BACKLOG OF NATIONAL POLLUTANT
DISCHARGE  ELIMINATION  SYSTEM
PERMITS

    EPA has recognized that the backlog in  issuing
NPDES permits is a nationwide problem.  In 1998 OIG
conducted audits in three states to assess  the extent of
permit backlogs. EPA had not issued or renewed most
of the required permits for municipal and  industrial
dischargers in Alaska and Idaho. Although Region 10
issued 33 permits  in 2Vz years, there were 1,000
applications waiting to be processed of  which 70
percent were more  than 4 years  old at the time. As a
result large numbers of dischargers were operating
without permits or had their permits administratively
extended without being subjected to more current  and
stringent discharge requirements. Also we found Kansas
did not reissue expired wastewater facility permits  in a
timely manner  and did not submit expired permits to
Region 7 for review; As a result the permitees may have
been allowed to discharge pollutants at levels that could
adversely affect human health and aquatic life.
    EPA reports that the backlog in EPA-issued major
permits has tripled over the last 10 years and the backlog
of state-issued permits has doubled over this time. EPA's
Office of Water developed a corrective action plan to
address this weakness.  Originally  EPA expected to
complete  corrective  action by 2004; however, the
completion date has since been delayed to 2005. The
Agency's "Clean and Safe Water"  goal for FY 2001
addresses the NPDES permit backlog.
    While reducing the NPDES backlog is important,
EPA needs to realize that its current permitting system
will probably never allow  for complete backlog
elimination. Accordingly EPA needs to identify those
areas where permitting will result in the greatest
environmental payback and permit those areas first. We
will continue to monitor the progress EPA makes in
addressing this important issue.

EPA'S WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH
THE STATES

    During the last two decades environmental and
human health protection programs have grown in size,
scope, and complexity. Many environmental problems
transcend media boundaries and solutions may require
innovative, cross-media approaches. EPA  and states
came to recognize that existing arrangements for
implementing environmental programs and addressing
environmental problems were not as  efficient and
effective as they could be. NEPPS established a new
framework to reinvent the EPA-state  working
relationship so that the  focus is on trying to work as
partners to accomplish very complex environmental
issues with scarce resources. EPA began implementing
PPGs in 1996 that allowed states and tribes to combine
multiple EPA grants into one grant. PPGs are important
tools for implementing NEPPS and share many of the
same objectives as NEPPS.

    A series of OIG audits on regional and state
NEPPS and PPG program implementation found that
NEPPS was not well-integrated into EPA because of
the lack of (1) leadership to provide clear direction and
set expectations, (2) training and guidance, (3) trust in
NEPPS due to fear of change and losing control, and
(4) goals and related performance measures to monitor
and  measure progress  on  achieving  better
environmental results. EPA can help increase NEPPS/
PPG success by providing training and establishing a
more collaborative, action-oriented process  for
111-18
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
establishing goals, defining EPA and state roles  and
responsibilities, agreeing on measures to assess
environmental progress, and obtaining commitments
for results to be achieved.
   EPA had not clearly established a central authority
or responsibility for NEPPS, and senior EPA
management had not clearly communicated its
expectations about NEPPS andPPGs. EPA staff often
did not know where to turn for specific information
on direction, expectations, and clarification. NEPPS was
perceived by EPA staff as a policy that was implemented
only if a state and EPA wanted it and that, even then,
allowed the state to choose the NEPPS components in
which it wanted to participate.
   The lack of clear goals, guidance, and training has
resulted in many EPA managers and staff having little
direction and lacking the skills needed to use NEPPS
effectively to carry out their environmental programs.
NEPPS created a great deal of concern among some
EPA managers and staff who believed NEPPS could
eliminate program and financial accountability. EPA and
states have not yet agreed on how to provide flexibility
to states along with accountability. EPA and state
managers struggled with how to provide states flexibility
to address their highest environmental priorities while
continuing to implement and report on core program
requirements  such  as permitting, inspections,  and
enforcement.
    Many EPA and state staff  still embodied their
media-specific, activity-based cultures and lacked trust
in the new system. They viewed their activity-based
authorities under the media-specific statutes as having
priority and had difficulty reconciling these media-
specific activities with NEPPS' cross-media, priority-
setting process that focuses  on environmental results
rather than on the number of permits and inspections.
    Although NEPPS and PPGs have their own overall
goals, EPA has not defined its performance measures
and related milestones to measure how the Agency and
its partners are progress ing toward accomplishing those
goals. EPA has not defined specific measurable goals
for evaluating whether  it is  making progress toward
obtaining environmental results and whether NEPPS
and PPGs are contributing to those results.

    The Agency  agreed  with many  of  the
recommendations presented in OIG audits and is in
the process of building the institutional capacity and
infrastructure to accomplish NEPPS work.  EPA
prepared a corrective action plan with milestone dates
that takes a comprehensive approach to addressing
NEPPS implementation. We believe that the increased
emphasis the Agency has recently placed  on this very
important area will result in more effective working
relationships and thus be more effective and efficient.
Because NEPPS is an integral part of all EPA programs,
the Agency needs to continue this recent attention. We
will continue to monitor Agency progress closely.
           KEY MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES AND SIGNIFICANT AGENCY PROGRESS
                                 TOWARDS THEIR RESOLUTION
                            (Prepared by EPA's Office of Inspector General)
SUPERFUND 5-YEAR REVIEWS

    The  Superfund statute requires that remedial
actions, where hazardous  substances, pollutants, or
contaminants remain onsite be reviewed every 5 years
to assure that human  health and the environment
continue to be protected. Some 5-year reviews found
that additional corrective actions were needed. This
issue is of growing importance because containment
remedies have been used more frequently since 1992.
    In March 1995 we reported that a substantial
number of 5-year reviews were not performed due
largely to the low priority given them by Agency
management. We recommended several options for
improving the program and reducing the backlog. At
that time Agency management agreed to implement
the recommendations or take other actions to address
the issues. However during our 1999 followup audit we
found that (1) the backlog of 5-year reviews was nearly
three times larger than at the time of the previous audit,
(2) approximately 30 percent of the reports did not
contain a definitive statement on protectiveness or
information in the report and seemed to conflict with
the statement made, and (3) results of the reviews were
not being reported to the Congress or the public.
I
I
                                                                 FY 2000 Management Accomplishments and Challenges
                                                                                                    111-19

-------
        We estimated that EPA might need to devote
    approximately $1 million above the expected spending
    level each year  for the next 3 years to eliminate the
    backlog. At the  conclusion of our followup audit the
    Agency had not yet committed the funds necessary for
    accomplishing this work.  The increasing use of
    containment  remedies, a growing backlog of 5-year
    reviews, the repeat nature of many of our findings,
    and a need to devote additional resources warrant EPAs
    formal recognition of the importance of the 5-year
    program and the establishment of necessary corrective
    actions as priority action items.

        EPA identified this  as an FY 1999 management
    control weakness with an FY 2002 correction date. EPA
    reports completing 51 percent of the backlog of 5-year
    reviews during FY 2000. Since it had projected a 3-year
    schedule to  eliminate the backlog, the Agency is
    progressing faster than expected. We will continue to
    monitor the Agency's progress in reducing the backlog.
                                                     significant progress were not made in the near future,
                                                     might withdraw their support, affecting EPAs ability
                                                     to accomplish its mission.

                                                         The Agency has made progress in the  last year.
                                                     Through a major effort the Agency issued LaMPs for
                                                     Lakes Michigan, Erie, and Superior and an action plan
                                                     for Lake Huron in April 2000. The Lake Ontario LaMP
                                                     was completed in 1998. These plans now serve as guides
                                                     for future activities on the Great Lakes. In addition EPA
                                                     programs are committed  to  LaMP implementation
                                                     priorities and a reinstituted Great Lakes  U.S. Policy
                                                     Committee to discuss RAP issues leading to increased
                                                     attention to RAP issues and initiation of RAP delisting
                                                     criteria. The Great Lakes National Program Office and
                                                     EPA Region 5 staff and management also have given
                                                     priority to resolving the recommendations in our 1999
                                                     report. They are keeping us informed about their
                                                     progress and indicate that most of the action items have
                                                     been resolved.
S3
W
"8
3
THE GREAT LAKES PROGRAM

    The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement between
the United States and Canada was signed over 25 years
ago. The purpose of  the Agreement is to restore and
maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of the Great Lakes basin ecosystem. The basin area is
home to more than one-tenth of the U.S. population
and has some of the world's largest concentrations of
industry.  Environmental  challenges   include
contaminated sediments, the effects on exotic species,
and loss of habitat.
    We  previously reported that EPA needed to
improve and complete its LaMPs and RAPs, which were
established as systematic and comprehensive ecosystem
approaches to address the Great Lakes. These plans
were taking considerably longer than expected to
complete. For example while  a draft LaMP  for Lake
Michigan was first published in 1992, it had never been
finalized. The statutory deadline for incorporating RAPs
into state water quality plans was January 1,  1993. At
the time of our review no U.S. RAPs had been fully
implemented. Without these plans there was  no
assurance that EPA was doing the right, most cost-
effective, and highest priority activities needed to protect
the Great Lakes. We reported that EPA and its partners
had been slow in restoring and maintaining the integrity
of the  Great Lakes basin. We found that states were
frustrated over the slow progress made and, if
111-20
         EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
          FY2000
ANNUAL REPORT
 FY 2000 ANNUAL
     FINANCIAL
   STATEMENTS
         SECTION IV


-------
                             TABLE OF CONTENTS







Message from the Deputy Chief Financial Officer	              IV-3




Chief Financial Officer's Analysis	              IV-5




Principal Financial Statements	              IV-11




OIG's Report on EPA's FY 2000 Financial Statements	              IV-61
                                                  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-1

-------
                               MESSAGE FROM THE
                 DEPUTY  CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
       I am pleased to present the fiscal year (FY) 2000 audited financial statements of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). This year the statements are presented for the first time as an integral part of our
Annual Report. As such, they offer Congress and the public a clear and comprehensive picture of the
Agency's progress over the past year under a single comprehensive document.  This year's financial
statements provide strong evidence of EPA's commitment to effective management of its resources and
finances. In addition, they portray progress toward the Office of the Chief Financial Officer's (OCFO) goal
of providing better and more timely cost information and reporting, thereby allowing EPA's program
offices to more efficiently accomplish their environmental and public health protection mission.

       EPA has achieved an unqualified opinion on its financial statements this year, an important
accomplishment and testimony to the diligent work of the finance community in addressing several financial
weaknesses noted in our prior year statements. An unqualified opinion conveys an important message
about sound financial management within an organization. It reflects that EPA has improved its methods,
processes and systems for recording and reporting financial information to the extent that it fairly presents
and characterizes the Agency's financial position, a significant issue for Congress, the public and our
stakeholders.

       During FY 2000, the OCFO  made significant progress on a number of important management
initiatives. In the area of results-based management, we issued EPA's revised Strategic Plan for FY 2000-
2005, which lays out the Agency's long-term goals, guides us in establishing annual goals, allows us to
measure progress in achieving our goals, and provides a basis from which Agency managers can focus
resources on the highest priority environmental issues.  We also issued our first Annual Performance
Report, providing Congress and the public with a comprehensive, plain-English account of Agency
performance. In the cost accounting arena, we established a new indirect cost accounting methodology
which substantially boosts the amount of Superfund cleanup costs we can expect to recover from
Responsible Parties.  In the budget area, we streamlined our process for managing Trust Fund carryover
funds: by making these resources immediately available to program managers for important environmental
projects, we not only reduced administrative burden, but also strengthened accountability.

       The OCFO also made great strides in improving the security of its financial management systems as
a result of numerous  independent reviews. We established an  OCFO Information Security Council to
provide direction and oversight to these efforts and began vulnerability and risk assessments of our critical
systems.  The rapidly changing and complex environment associated with systems  security will require
constant and long term vigilance to protect against intruders.

       Over the past year, we also made substantial progress in planning an orderly replacement of our
legacy systems with more modern and integrated financial systems.  We completed the evaluation for
replacing our aging payroll system and created a centralized staff to oversee the planning and integration of
our critical systems. In addition, the  OCFO moved to modernize the Agency's financial reporting tools by
adopting a new, user-friendly Financial Data Warehouse.  These systems efforts, along with our on-going
automation initiatives in travel, grants and vendor payments, go a long way toward ensuring sound
stewardship, optimal leveraging of resources, and the integrity of our critical data.  The ultimate benefit for
our program managers and stakeholders will be better, faster, and easier to use financial data, cost
information and reporting tools to support day-to-day  decision-making needs as well as long range planning
efforts.

                                                    EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-3

-------
       Many challenges lie ahead as we enter a new era of public stewardship and accountability.  For
example, our systems modernization efforts have just begun. While we anticipate our payroll replacement
efforts will move along substantially this year, the groundwork for replacing our core financial management
system has only recently gotten underway. We also look forward to improving our cost accounting
processes by capturing and reporting additional financial information to better serve the needs of EPA's
program managers.

       I would like to express my thanks to all the people who helped EPA obtain its unqualified opinion
on the financial statements.  Such an achievement requires a tremendous effort from individuals at all levels
of the organization.  The preparation and presentation of fairly presented and timely financial statements is
dependent on the day-to-day effort of countless individuals. Whether they carefully record and monitor
transactions, oversee budget execution, operate our financial systems,  develop accounting policies, provide
financial analysis or audit our statements, we owe a debt of gratitude to them all.  The preparation of EPA's
financial statements has been a collaborative  effort among many organizations — the OCFO, the Office of
the Inspector General, and EPA's many program, regional and administrative offices. I want to
acknowledge the hard work and commitment of all the employees throughout the Agency who contributed
to this effort.

       I believe we have established a stable, yet dynamic, environment for implementing sound financial
management within EPA. We intend to enhance and build upon this solid foundation.
As we work toward forging stronger partnerships with our stakeholders and developing innovative and
market-based approaches to improving our protection of the environment and the public health of all
Americans, accurate, timely and useful financial information becomes  critical to our success. We are
committed to maintaining high standards as we face the challenges associated with modernizing and
continually improving our financial and management systems and processes.
                                                        Michael W.S. Ryan
                                                        Deputy Chief Financial Officer
    IV-4    EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements IV-5

-------
   Chief Financial Officer's Analysis  of Financial Statement Audit

                 and Summary of FY 2000 Accomplishments


                            Summary of Auditor's Report and Opinions

       The Agency prepared the following FY 2000 Financial  Statements: Statement of Financial Position (Balance
Sheet), Statement of Changes in Net Position, Statement of Net Cost, Statement of Budgetary Resources, Statement
of Financing, and Statement of Custodial Activity. Each of these statements was broken out between the Superfund
appropriation and all other funds. In addition, we prepared a Statement of Net Cost by Goal for each of the
Agency's ten Strategic Goals.

       The Office of Inspector General (OIG) stated "In our  opinion, the consolidating financial statements
present fairly the consolidated and individual assets, liabilities, net position, net cost, net cost by goal, changes in net
position, budgetary resources, reconciliation of net cost to budgetary obligations, and custodial activity of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and its subsidiary funds, the  Superfund Trust Fund and All Other Appropriated
Funds, as of and for the year ended September 30, 2000, in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles." No material weaknesses were reported.

Report on Internal Controls

       Although the OIG did not identify any material weaknesses, the audit report listed seven "reportable
conditions," which are described below, along with a short statement on the Agency's position with respect to each of
those items.

•      Process for Preparing Financial Statements - The OIG recommended that the Office of the Chief Financial
       Officer (OCFO) continue its aggressive efforts to improve the preparation and presentation of the Agency's
       financial statements and to advance the time frame for  completion of the statements.  OCFO agrees and will
       continue  to work closely with the OIG in making those improvements.

•      Accounting for Capitalized Property - The OIG made  eight recommendations for improving accountability
       over and  accounting for Agency property assets.  OCFO and the Office of Administration and Resources
       Management (OARM) have agreed with most of the OIG's recommendations and will be improving
       guidance, stressing quality control and performing additional followup with the offices directly responsible
       for property.

•      EPA's Process for Reviewing Unliquidated Obligations — The OIG made no new recommendations and
       acknowledged the actions we have taken to date to monitor unliquidated obligations and to ensure they are
       deobligated timely when appropriate.

•      EPA's Interagency Agreement Invoice Approval Process — The OIG made no new recommendations and
       recognized Agency progress in implementing corrective actions from earlier audit reports.

•      Documentation and Approval of Journal Vouchers — The OIG recommended that appropriate OCFO staff
       review Agency policy and procedures on journal vouchers and ensure that vouchers are properly documented
       prior to approval.  OCFO agrees with that action.

•      Timely Repayment of Asbestos Loan Debt to Treasury — The OIG recommended that OCFO develop a
       schedule  for repaying asbestos loan debt to Treasury on an annual basis and to reduce asbestos loan
       borrowing authority to zero.  OCFO agrees to develop the recommended schedule and has already reduced
       borrowing authority to zero.
    IV-6   EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
•      Automated Application Processing Controls for the Integrated Financial Management System (IFMS) — The
       OIG made no new recommendations.  The audit report summarized the history of the discussions between
       the OIG and OCFO on this topic and noted that in FY 2001 the OCFO will be taking steps to develop a
       project team to replace IFMS.  OCFO believes the IFMS replacement project will address the OIG's
       concerns about the adequacy of automated application controls.

Compliance with Laws and Regulations

Compliance with the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act (FFMIA)

       The OIG identified only one instance where they believed the OCFO was in substantial noncompliance with
the FFMIA: the OIG believes that EPA does not comply with Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards
Number 4, also known as the Managerial Cost Accounting Standards.  Specifically, OIG's position is that EPA does
not adequately: (1) determine the full cost of its activities; (2) accumulate and report the cost of activities on a regular
basis for management information and other stakeholder purposes; and (3) always use appropriate costing
methodologies to accumulate and assign cost to outputs.

       While OCFO agrees that improvements in cost accounting can be made, OCFO believes that the Agency
does comply with this Standard. A detailed discussion of this issue is provided in Section III of this Report under
"Management Challenges." We will continue to improve Agency cost accounting and will work with the OIG on
these improvements.

Other Noncompliance Issues

       The OIG identified two other areas where they believed the OCFO had noncompliances that were not
substantial and therefore not in violation of FFMIA.

•      The OIG noted that EPA was unable to reconcile intra-governmental transactions. However, the OIG
       commended EPA's proactive approach to reconciling and acknowledged that the resolution of this issue
       requires Federal level action since EPA does not have control over the other federal agencies with which it
       must reconcile.

•      The OIG stated that EPA's financial system security plans continued to be noncompliant, although they
       recognized that progress had been made.  They also reported that they had determined that the Agency
       Remediation  Plan, submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on November 13, 2000,
       sufficiently addressed their prior concerns.

       The OIG also noted that EPA is not complying with appropriation law when making disbursements for
grants funded with more than one appropriation. However, this issue does not affect the audit opinion on the
financial statements.

Progress in Correcting Previously Identified Problems

       OCFO management undertook a concerted effort to resolve a backlog of audit issues raised in previous
years.  Consequently, issues such as financial statement preparation (discussed in the next section) and accounts
receivable have been resolved or downgraded as major issues. The OIG has accepted all of the OCFO's proposed
corrective actions raised in the FY 1998 and 1999 financial statement audits (except for cost accounting as noted
above). The Agency has not encountered any significant impediments  to correcting problems. One specific
challenge for 2001 is the need to revise the methodology for determining accrued grant expenses.
                                                       EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-7

-------
                                       OCFO Accomplishments

Planning, Analysis and Accountability

        Revised Strategic Plan. Working with the rest of the Agency, OCFO developed and issued EPA's revised
Strategic Plan for FY 2000-2005. The Strategic Plan lays out the Agency's ten long-term goals and guides us in
establishing annual goals, allows us to measure how far we have come towards achieving our goals, and provides a
basis from which Agency managers can focus resources on the highest priority environmental issues and ensure that
we use taxpayer dollars effectively to achieve environmental results.

        Annual Performance Report. In FY 2000, EPA completed its first full planning and accountability cycle
under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) with the  March 2000 submission of its first Annual
Performance Report.  The Report presents to Congress and the public a comprehensive, plain-English account of
EPA's FY 1999 performance.

        Results-Based Management. The Deputy Administrator met with senior Agency managers in a series of
meetings to discuss FY 1999 results and lessons learned, mid-year performance toward FY 2000 annual performance
goals, progress toward long-term strategic goals, and work under way to improve performance measurement.  Senior
managers also discussed the broader lessons learned from the Agency's  experience with GPRA implementation to
date and improvements to be made for the future.  In addition, to promote development of more outcome-oriented
performance goals and measures, OCFO provided training workshops,  technical assistance, and feedback on GPRA
products to Agency managers and staff. The FY 2001 Annual Performance Plan had 5% more outcome-based goals
than the FY 1999 Annual Performance Plan.

        Improving Agency Management.  EPA has made substantial progress toward resolving programmatic and
administrative issues that have the potential to affect the Agency's ability to achieve  its mission.  Since 1990, EPA has
corrected 27 integrity weaknesses and numerous major management challenges. In addition, EPA made significant
progress in reducing the number of audits without final action as well as strengthening its audit management practices
Agency-wide. In FY 2000, EPA reduced the number of audits without  final action after 1 year by 35 percent and was
responsible for addressing OIG recommendations and tracking follow-up activities on 503 audits.

Audited Financial Statements

        EPA made substantial progress this year in preparing quality financial statements in a  timely manner.  The
improvements made this year are phase one of a two-phased plan for improving the Agency's  financial statement
process. Our efforts began with completing a  data integrity evaluation of our financial system by: (1) analyzing each
accounting transaction to ensure all entries are proper; (2) conducting general ledger account analyses to identify
accounts with incorrect balances; and (3) analyzing account relationships between proprietary and budgetary accounts.


        The Agency also implemented a new policy document and supplemental procedural guidance on preparing
and submitting annual audited financial statements in coordination with the  OIG. This guidance established a formal
process to monitor timelines for preparing annual financial statements as well as addressing audit questions and
adjustments. In addition, guidance was implemented to establish more  timely, accurate, and reliable reporting on
EPA's trading partners.

        Finally, the Agency successfully implemented an automated FACTS II process in its financial system and
successfully submitted its budgetary reports electronically to Treasury via FACTS II.

        We believe that the above and future efforts will continue to enhance the Agency's ability to prepare and
publish complete, concise, understandable and meaningful information  about the financial and operating performance
of the Agency.
    IV-8   EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
Streamlining Business Processes and Meeting Customer Needs

        EPA took a number of steps to streamline and automate the Agency's administrative systems to provide the
best services with reduced burden to our customers.  For example, Agency grant recipients are beginning to benefit
directly from a new system that allows them to request their funds on-line, and EPA is automating the entire travel
reimbursement process, a significant reduction in administrative burden. EPA earned Governmentwide recognition
for its efforts, along with several other agencies, to implement an on-line system that allows employees to view and
update many payroll and benefits options such as health plan  choices. The Agency also made substantial progress in
replacing its aging payroll system, and efforts are now under way to replace the Integrated Financial Management
System. Finally, EPA developed a financial data warehouse to improve Agency access to a range of financial and
program data in order to better manage programs.

Systems Integration and Security

        Integration  of Systems Implementation Project.  The Deputy CFO created a new Systems Planning and
Integration Staff (SPIS) within the  Office of the Comptroller's (OC) immediate office in response to several existing
and emerging challenges with systems initiatives. These initiatives include improving financial performance through
better financial management systems and providing the Agency with resource systems, policies, and support necessary
to carry out resource  management  responsibilities. SPIS will provide OCFO with a centralized focus for planning,
budgeting, integrating, and implementing OC financial systems.

        The initial focus of SPIS is on replacing the Agency's payroll system, EPA's Personnel and Payroll System
(EPAYS), and its supporting systems, and on  assessing the need to replace or modernize the Agency's core financial
management system,  the Integrated Financial  Management System (IFMS).  In addition, SPIS will undertake a
number of smaller projects where targeted technology changes create opportunities for improved services and
streamlined processes.

        Financial System Security. EPA's Deputy CFO established the OCFO Information Security Council to:
(1) provide direction and oversight to financial and mixed system security efforts; (2) raise significant financial
information security issues; (3) ensure coordination with other Agency offices; and (4) support proper security
practices. In addition, OCFO conducted, in partnership with the Office of Environmental Information and the
Office of Administration and Resources Management, Technical Vulnerability Assessments (TVAs) on the Agency's
most critical financial systems.

Working Capital Fund

        EPA's Office of Administration provides postage services and the Office of Technology, Operations, and
Planning (OTOP) provides Agency wide services for telecommunications, mainframe computer services, and other
Information Technology support. Since FY 1997, these activities have been financed by charges to Agency customers
through a Working Capital Fund (WCF). The WCF undertook a number of initiatives to strengthen the overall
operation and reporting of the Fund in our on-going efforts to provide quality services at competitive prices.

        A WCF Review Team was assembled on behalf of the WCF Board of Directors to review and analyze the
business, financial, accounting, and budget practices of the WCF Activities, as well as the cost and rates  associated
with the services provided.  As a result, the Service Providers  have been able to better align their costs with the
services they support, resulting in equitable rates for the services provided.

        When the WCF was established and began operations in 1997, one of the primary business principles was to
recover full operating costs through the Fund's billing rates.  However, in the past, EPA has not recovered certain
required costs such as rent, utilities, etc.  During FY 2000, OCFO established a policy requiring the recovery of full
costs and the Agency is now recovering full cost in the Fund.
                                                        EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-9

-------
        A team was commissioned to reconcile the OTOP's property records and to establish up-dated policies and
procedures to accurately account for WCF property. As a result of this review, the WCF can now better identify
capital equipment and property and compute precise depreciation costs for inclusion in the service rates.

Deb t Managemen t

        During FY 2000, the Agency pursued various initiatives to improve its management and collection of
outstanding accounts receivable in the Superfund program where the vast majority of the Agency's outstanding
receivables reside.

        Together with the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) and the OIG, accounts
receivable management reviews were conducted in three of EPA's regional offices, with three more planned for
FY2001. The reviews helped identify issues whose resolution will improve accounts receivable management. One
such area was the need for additional policy and guidance for overdue debts.  In response, OCFO and OECA issued
guidance addressing the referral of overdue Superfund accounts receivable to the Department of Justice (DOJ).  The
EPA offices are currently working with DOJ to finalize policies for final disposition of Superfund debts.

Workforce Assessment

        In the coming years, the most critical challenge facing OCFO management is to ensure that our most
important asset, our staff, is well-placed to meet the challenges of the future.  Changing technology and other factors
are presaging a shift in the nature of work performed by OCFO staff, a shift from financial transaction-based
processing to information management and analysis. In conjunction with the Agency wide workforce planning and
assessment efforts described previously in this Annual Report, OCFO has completed the first phase of an assessment
that formally sets out strategies for training, recruitment, and deployment of OCFO's human resources.
    IV-10  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements IV-11

-------
                                      CONTENTS
Financial Statements
       Consolidating Balance Sheet
       Consolidated Statement of Net Cost by Goal
       Consolidating Statement of Net Cost
       Consolidating Statement of Changes in Net Position
       Combined Statement of Budgetary Resources
       Combined Statement of Financing
       Consolidated Statement of Custodial Activity

Notes to Financial Statements

       Note 1.  Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
       Note 2.  Fund Balances with Treasury
       Note 3.  Cash
       Note 4.  Investments
       Note 5.  Accounts Receivable
       Note 6.  Other Assets
       Note 7.  Loans Receivable, Net - Non-Federal
       Note 8.  Inventory and Property Received in Settlement
       Note 9.  General Plant, Property and Equipment
       Note 10. Debt
       Note 11. Custodial Liability
       Note 12. Other Liabilities
       Note 13. Leases
       Note 14. Pensions and Other Actuarial Benefits
       Note 15. Cashout Advances and Deferrals, Superfund
       Note 16. Unexpended Appropriations
       Note 17. Amounts Held by Treasury
       Note 18. Commitments and Contingencies
       Note 19. Grant Accrual
       Note 20. Environmental Cleanup Costs
       Note 21. Superfund  State Credits
       Note 22. Superfund  Preauthorized Mixed Funding Agreements
       Note 23. Income and Expenses from Other Appropriations
       Note 24. Custodial Non-Exchange Revenues
       Note 25. Statement of Budgetary Resources
       Note 26. Adjustments
       Note 27. Unobligated Balances
       Note 28. Obligated Balance, Net - End of Period
       Note 29. Difference  in Outlays between Statement of Budgetary Resources and SF-133
       Note 30. Statement of Financing
       Note 31. Beginning Unobligated Balances - All Other Statement of Budgetary Resources
       Note 32. Change in Accounting for Trust Funds
       Note 33. Costs Not Assigned to Goals
       Note 34. Transfers-in and out, Statement of Changes in Net Position
                                                  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-13

-------
Notes to Financial Statements (continued)

       Note 35. Imputed Financing
       Note 36. Change in Accounting for Cashout Interest, Superfund

Supplemental Information Requested by OMB

   Required Supplemental Information

         Deferred Maintenance (Unaudited)
         Intra-governmental Assets (Unaudited)
         Intra-governmental Liabilities (Unaudited)
         Supplemental Statement of Budgetary Resources (Unaudited)
         Working Capital Fund Supplemental Balance Sheet (Unaudited)
         Working Capital Fund Supplemental Statement of Net Cost (Unaudited)
         Working Capital Fund Supplemental Statement of Changes in Net Position (Unaudited)
         Working Capital Fund Supplemental Statement of Budgetary Resources (Unaudited)
         Working Capital Fund Supplemental Statement of Financing (Unaudited)

   Required Supplemental Stewardship Information

         Annual Stewardship Information (Unaudited)
   IV-14  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
                                Environmental Protection Agency
                                   Consolidating Balance Sheet
                                      As of September 30, 2000
                                        (Dollars in Thousands)
ASSETS
  Intragovernmental:
  Fund Balance with Treasury (Note 2)
  Investments (Note 4)
  Accounts Receivable, Net (Note 5)
  Other (Note 6)
  Total Intragovemmental

  Accounts Receivable, Net (Note 5)
  Loans Receivables, Net - Non Federal (Note 7)
  Cash (Note 3)
  Inventory and Property Received in Settlement, Net
       (Note 8)
  General Property, Plant and Equipment, Net (Note 9)
  Other (Note 6)
Total Assets
LIABILITIES
  Intragovemmental:
  Accounts Payable
  Debt (Note 10)
  Accrued Liabilities
  Custodial Liability (Note  11)
  Other (Note 12)
  Total Intragovemmental
  Accounts Payable
  Pensions and Other Actuarial Liabilities (Note 14)
  Environmental Cleanup Costs (Note 20)
  Accrued Liabilities
  Cashout Advances and Deferrals, Superfund (Note 15)
  Commitments and Contingencies (Note 18)
  Other (Note 12)
Total Liabilities
NET POSITION
 Unexpended Appropriations (Note 16)
 Cumulative Results  of Operations

Total Net Position

Total Liabilities and Net Position
Superfund
Trust Fund
$ 37,397 1
3,960,313
40,671
21,789
4,060,170
617,039
0
0
5,086
13,581
750
$ 4,696,626 5
$ 75,467 1
0
51,748
0
8,848
136,063
46,066
6,637
0
145,358
372,586
5,000
63,024
774,734
0
3,921,892
3,921,892
All Combined Intra-agency Consolidated
Others Totals Eliminations Totals
f 11,059,256 }
1,593,357
34,371
7,452
12,694,436
87,895
89,128
48
347
473,028
1,712
f 13,346,594 ?
f 1,506 }
37,922
50,580
102,469
28,849
221,326
84,956
27,036
15,499
631,909
0
2,950
200,510
1,184,186
10,119,838
2,042,570
12,162,408
f 11,096,653 $
5,553,670
75,042
29,241
16,754,606
704,934
89,128
48
5,433
486,609
2,462
f 18,043,220 $
f 76,973 $
37,922
102,328
102,469
37,697
357,389
131,022
33,673
15,499
777,267
372,586
7,950
263,534
1,958,920
10,119,838
5,964,462
16,084,300
0 $
0
(4,191)
(6,51(fi
(10,701)
0
0
0
0
0
0
(10,701) $
0 $
0
(4,191)
0
(6,510)
(10,701)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(10,701)
0
0
0
11,096,653
5,553,670
70,851
22,731
16,743,905
704,934
89,128
48
5,433
486,609
2,462
18,032,519
76,973
37,922
98,137
102,469
31,187
346,688
131,022
33,673
15,499
777,267
372,586
7,950
263,534
1,948,219
10,119,838
5,964,462
16,084,300
$ 4.696.626 $ 13.346.594 $ 18.043.220  $    (10.701) $   18.032.519
                      The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
                                                       EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-15

-------
                             Environmental Protection Agency
                       Consolidated Statement of Net Cost by Goal
                          For the Year Ended September 30, 2000
                                   (Dollars in Thousands)
COSTS:
  Intragovernmental
  With the Public
    Total Costs


  Less:
    Earned Revenues
    Total Revenue
Management Cost Allocation     55,155
Clean and
Clean Safe
Air Water
$ 74,193 :
462,922
537,115
219
219
I 153,480 $
3,209,971
3,363,451
5,794
5,794
Better
Safe Prevent Waste
Food Pollution Management
23,286 $
80,003
103,289
21,247
21,247
37,685 |
231,151
268,836
4,180
4,180
! 414,860 $
1,478,910
1,893,770
336,253
336,253
Global
Risks
34,480
179,880
214,360
6,939
6,939
NET COST OF
OPERATIONS
           75,785
592.051
3.433.442
            22,444
           35,815
139,392
16,236
104.486  $  300.471  $  1.696.909   $_
             223.657
Detailed descriptions of the above Goals are provided in EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report, Section II — GPRA
Performance Results by Strategic Goal.
                   The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
   IV-16  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
                             Environmental Protection Agency
                       Consolidated Statement of Net Cost by Goal
                          For the Year Ended September 30, 2000
                                   (Dollars in Thousands)
COSTS:
  Intragovernmental
  With the Public
    Total Costs


  Less:
    Earned Revenues
    Total Revenue
Management Cost Allocation     23,447
Right Not
to Sound Credible Effective Assigned Consolidated
Know Science Deterrent Management to Goals* Totals
$ 27,229 $
114,439
141,668
338
338
49,203 ?
286,882
336,085
1,490
1,490
f 69,713 }
317,423
387,136
495
495
f 139,354 $
339,874
479,228
1,694
1,694
120,149 $
25,346
145,495
3,335
3,335
1,143,632
6,726,801
7,870,433
381,984
381,984
           31,613
77,647    (477,534)
NET COST OF
OPERATIONS
164.777  $  366.208  $ 464.288
                     142.160
7.488.449
* See Note 33.
Detailed descriptions of the above Goals are provided in EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report, Section II — GPRA
Performance Results by Strategic Goal.
                   The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
                                                EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements IV-17

-------
                               Environmental Protection Agency
                             Consolidating Statement of Net Cost
                            For the Year Ended September 30, 2000
                                     (Dollars  in Thousands)
COSTS:

  Intragovernmental

  With the Public

  Expenses from Other Appropriations (Note 23)

  Total Costs
                                          Superfund      All      Combined   Intra-agency Consolidated
                                         Trust Fund   Others      Totals     Eliminations    Totals
 373,311  $  787,415 $   1,160,726 $    (17,094) $   1,143,632

1,259,464    5,467,337     6,726,801           0     6,726,801

  31,270     (31,270)            000
1,664,045    6,223,482     7,887,527      (17,094)    7,870,433
  Less:

  Earned Revenues

  Total Revenue
 307,200

 307,200
91,878
91,878
399,078     (17,094)
399,078     (17,094)
381,984
381,984
NET COST OF OPERATIONS
1,356,845  $ 6,131,604 $   7,488,449
                            0 $  7,488,449
                     The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
    IV-18   EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
           Environmental Protection Agency
  Consolidating Statement of Changes in Net Position
        For the Year Ended September 30, 2000
                 (Dollars in Thousands)
                    Superfund   All    Combined  Intra-agency  Consolidated
                    Trust Fund  Others    Totals    Eliminations    Totals
Net Cost of Operations !j
Financing Sources (Other Than Exchange Revenues):
Appropriations Used
Taxes and Non-Exchange Interest (Note 17)
Other Non-Exchange Revenue
Imputed Financing (Note 35)
Trust Fund Appropriations Received (Note 17)
Income from Other Appropriations (Note 23)
Transfers-In (Note 34)
Transfers-Out (Note 34)
Net Results of Operations before Trust Fund and
Cashout Interest Accounting Changes
Cumulative Effect of Trust Fund Accounting Change
on Prior Years' Net Results of Operations (Note 32)
Cumulative Effect of Accounting Change for Cashout
Interest on Prior Years' Net Results of Operations
(Note 36)
Net Results of Operations
Increases/(Decreases) in Unexpended Appropriations
Change in Net Position
Net Position - Beginning of Period
Net Position - End of Period !j
f 1,356,845 1

0
240,808
1,192
32,063
700,000
31,270
9,707
(122,935)
(464,740)
2,656,831
85,382
2,277,473
(2,656,831)
(379,358)
4,301,250
f 3,921,892 1
', 6,131,604 5

6,632,631
260,272
12,958
168,659
(700,000)
(31,270)
63,730
(990)
274,386
91,596
0
365,982
42,874
408,856
11,753,552
i 12,162,408 5
f 7,488,449 $

6,632,631
501,080
14,150
200,722
0
0
73,437
(123,925)
(190,354)
2,748,427
85,382
2,643,455
(2,613,957)
29,498
16,054,802
f 16,084,300 $
0 $

0
0
0
0
0
0
(48,725)
48,725
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o $
7,488,449

6,632,631
501,080
14,150
200,722
0
0
24,712
(75,200)
(190,354)
2,748,427
85,382
2,643,455
(2,613,957)
29,498
16,054,802
16,084,300
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
                             EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-19

-------
                              Environmental Protection Agency
                       Combined Statement of Budgetary Resources
                             For the Year Ended September 30, 2000
                                       (Dollars in Thousands)
Budgetary Resources

Budget Authority
Unobligated Balances, Beginning of Period (Note 31)
Net Transfers, Prior Period Balances
Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections
Adjustments (Note 26)
Total Budgetary Resources

Status of Budgetary Resources

Obligations Incurred
Unobligated Balances Available - Apportioned (Note 27)
Unobligated Balances Not Available (Note 27)
Total, Status of Budgetary Resources

Outlays

Obligations Incurred
Less: Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections and Adjustments
      Subtotal

Obligated Balance, Net - Beginning of Period
Less: Obligated Balance, Net - End of Period (Note 28)
Total Outlays
                                                               Superfund
                                                               Trust Fund
              All
            Others
          Combined
           Totals
 1,346,470
   482,872
        0
   123,161
   199,372
6,920,006
1,674,675
    (977)
 311,272
  27,847
8,266,476
2,157,547
    (977)
 434,433
 227,219
 2,151,875  $  8,932,823  $  11,084,698
 1,701,337  $  7,158,665  $   8,860,002
   449,538     1,644,998      2,094,536
     1,000      129,160       130,160
 2,151,875  $  8,932,823  $  11,084,698
 1,701,337  $  7,158,665  $   8,860,002
 (324,821)     (420,189)      (745,010)
 1,376,516     6,738,476
             8,114,992
 2,433,861     9,153,233     11,587,094
(2,283,790)   (9,289,444)    (11,573,234)
 1,526,587
6,602,265
8,128,852
                     The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
    IV-20  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
                            Environmental Protection Agency
                            Combined Statement of Financing
                         For the Year Ended September 30, 2000
                                   (Dollars in Thousands)
                                                             Superfund
                                                            Trust Fund
                All      Combined
               Others      Totals
Obligations and Nonbudgetary Resources
Obligations Incurred
Less: Spending Authority for Offsetting Collections and Adjustments
   Earned Reimbursements
      Collected
      Receivable from Federal Sources
   Change in Unfilled Customer Orders (Decreases)/Increases
   Transfers from Trust Funds
Recoveries of Prior Year Obligations
Financing Imputed for Cost Subsidies (Note 35)
Income from Other Appropriations (Note 23)
Transfers-In/(Out) of Nonmonetary Assets
Exchange Revenue Not in the Entity's Budget
Total Obligations as Adjusted and Nonbudgetary Resources
Resources that Do Not Fund Net Cost of Operations
Change in Amount of Goods,  Services,  and Benefits Ordered but Not
   Yet Provided - (Increases)/Decreases
Change in Unfilled Customer Orders, etc.
Costs Capitalized on the Balance Sheet - (Increases)/Decreases
   General Plant, Property and Equipment
   Purchases of Inventory
   Adjustments to Costs Capitalized on the Balance Sheet
Collections that Decrease Credit Program Receivables or Increase
      Credit Program Liabilities
Adjustment for Trust Fund Outlays that Do Not Affect Net Cost
Total Resources that Do Not Fund Net Costs of Operations
Components of Costs that Do Not Require or Generate Resources
Depreciation and Amortization
Bad Debt Related to Uncollectible Non-Credit Reform Receivables
Revaluation of Assets and Liabilities
Loss on Disposition of Assets
Other Expenses Not Requiring Budgetary Resources
Total Costs That Do Not Require Resources
Financing Sources Yet to be Provided (Note 30)
Net Costs of Operations
$   1,701,337 $   7,158,665 $   8,860,002
(108,997)
13,324
(17,846)
(9,642)
(201,660)
32,063
31,270
39
(215,449)
1,224,439
143,536
17,846
(3,827)
0
0
0
(38,090)
119,465
3,654
3,075
0
(813)
45
5,961
6,980
1,356,845 $
(230,981)
20,720
(54,653)
(46,358)
(111,767)
168,659
(31,270)
0
(3,088)
6,869,927
(74,345)
53,227
(107,711)
(68)
153
5,014
(652,268)
(775,998)
20,651
1,518
(165)
0
3,409
25,413
12,262
6,131,604 $
(339,978)
34,044
(72,499)
(56,000)
(313,427)
200,722
0
39
(218,537)
8,094,366
69,191
71,073
(111,538)
(68)
153
5,014
(690,358)
(656,533)
24,305
4,593
(165)
(813)
3,454
31,374
19,242
7,488,449
                 The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
                                                    EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-21

-------
                         Environmental Protection Agency
                   Consolidated Statement of Custodial Activity
                      For the Year Ended September 30, 2000
                               (Dollars in Thousands)
Revenue Activity:

Sources of Collections:

  Fines and Penalties                                                76,850

  Other                                                       $  18,418

  Total Cash Collections                                             95,268

  Accrual Adjustment                                               (8,678)

  Total Custodial Revenue                                            86,590

Disposition of Collections:


Transferred to Others (General Fund)                                   97,730

Increases/(Decreases) in Amounts To Be Transferred                     (11,140)

Total Disposition of Collections                                       86r590

Net Custodial Revenue Activity                                     $       0
               The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.



IV-22  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
                             Environmental Protection Agency
                               Notes to Financial Statements
                                   (Dollars in Thousands)
Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

A. Basis of Presentation

These consolidating financial statements have been prepared to report the financial position and results of
operations of the Environmental Protection Agency (Agency) for the Hazardous Substance Superfund
(Superfund) Trust Fund and All Other Funds, as required by the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 and
the Government Management Reform Act of 1994. The reports have been prepared from the books and
records of the Agency in accordance with "Form and Content for Agency Financial Statements," specified
by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in Bulletin 97-01, and the Agency's accounting policies
which are summarized in this note. In addition to the guidance in Bulletin 97-01, the Statement of Net Cost
has been prepared by the EPA strategic goals.  These statements are therefore different from the financial
reports also prepared by the Agency pursuant to OMB directives that are used to monitor and control the
Agency's use of budgetary resources.

B. Reporting Entities

The Environmental Protection Agency was created in 1970 by executive reorganization from various
components of other Federal agencies in order to better marshal and coordinate Federal pollution control
efforts.  The Agency is generally organized around the media and substances it regulates — air, water, land,
hazardous waste, pesticides and toxic substances.  For FY 2000, the reporting entities are grouped as
Hazardous Substance Superfund and All Other Funds.

Hazardous Substance Superfund

In 1980, the Hazardous Substance Superfund, commonly referred to as the Superfund Trust Fund, was
established by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
(CERCLA) to provide resources needed to respond to and clean up hazardous substance emergencies and
abandoned, uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. The Superfund Trust Fund financing is shared by Federal
and state governments as well as industry. The Agency allocates funds from its appropriation to other
Federal agencies to carry out the Act. Risks to public health and the environment at uncontrolled hazardous
waste sites qualifying for the Agency's National Priorities List (NPL) are reduced and addressed through a
process involving site assessment and analysis, and the design and implementation of cleanup remedies.
Throughout this process, cleanup activities may be supported by shorter term removal actions to reduce
immediate risks. Removal actions may include removing contaminated material from the site, providing an
alternative water supply to people living nearby, and installing security measures. NPL cleanups and
removals are conducted and financed by the Agency, private parties, or other Federal agencies.  Superfund
includes the Treasury collections and investment activity.  The Superfund Trust Fund is accounted for under
Treasury symbol number 8145.

All Other Funds

All Other Funds include Trust Fund appropriations, General Fund appropriations, Revolving Funds, Special
Funds, the Agency Budgetary Clearing accounts, Deposit Funds, General Fund Receipt accounts, the

                                                  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-23

-------
Environmental Services Special Fund Receipt Account, the Miscellaneous Contributed Funds Trust Fund,
and General Fund appropriations transferred from other Federal agencies as authorized by the Economy
Act of 1932. Trust Fund appropriations are to the Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Trust Fund
and the Oil Spill Response Trust Fund. General Fund appropriations are to State and Tribal Assistance
Grants (STAG),  Science and Technology (S&T), Environmental Programs and Management (EPM), Office
of Inspector General (IG), Buildings and Facilities (B&F), and Payment to the Hazardous Substance
Superfund. General Fund appropriations that no longer receive current appropriations but have
unexpended authority are the Program and Research Operations (PRO), and Energy, Research and
Development. Revolving Funds include the FIFRA Revolving Fund and Tolerance Revolving Fund, which
receive no direct appropriations; however, they do collect fees from public industry as a source of
reimbursement for the services provided. In addition to FIFRA and Tolerance, a Working Capital Fund
(WCF) was established and designated as a franchise fund to provide computer operations support and
postage service for the Agency. A Special Fund was established to collect the Exxon Valdez settlement as a
result of the Exxon Valdez oil spill.  All Other Funds are as follows:

The LUST Trust Fund was authorized by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
(SARA) as amended by the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990. The LUST appropriation
provides funding to respond to releases from leaking underground petroleum tanks. The Agency oversees
cleanup and enforcement programs  which are implemented by the states. Funds are allocated to the states
through cooperative agreements  to  clean up those sites posing the greatest threat to human health and
environment. Funds are used for grants to non-state entities including Indian tribes under Section 8001 of
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.  The program is financed  by a 0.1 cent a gallon tax on motor
fuels, which will expire in 2005, and is accounted for under Treasury symbol number 8153.

The Oil Spill Response Trust Fund was authorized by the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990.  The Oil Spill
Response Trust Fund was established in FY 1993 and monies were appropriated to the Oil Spill Response
Trust Fund. The Agency is  responsible for directing, monitoring and providing technical assistance for
major inland oil spill response activities.  This involves setting oil prevention and response standards,
initiating enforcement actions for compliance with OPA and Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure
requirements, and directing response actions when appropriate. The Agency carries out research to improve
response actions to oil spills including research on the use of remediation techniques such as dispersants and
bioremediation. Funding of oil spill cleanup actions is provided through the Department of Transportation
under the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund and reimbursable funding from other Federal agencies. The Oil
Spill Response Trust Fund is accounted for under Treasury symbol number 8221.

The State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) appropriation provides funds for environmental programs
and infrastructure assistance including capitalization grants for State revolving funds and performance
partnership grants.  Environmental programs and infrastructure supported are Clean and Safe Water;
Capitalization grants for the Drinking Water State Revolving Funds; Clean Air; Direct grants for Water and
Wastewater Infrastructure needs, Partnership grants to meet Health Standards, Protect Watersheds,
Decrease Wetland Loss, and Address Agricultural and  Urban  Runoff and Storm Water; Better Waste
Management; Preventing Pollution and Reducing Risk in Communities, Homes, Workplaces and
Ecosystems; and Reduction of Global and Cross Border Environmental  Risks.   STAG is accounted for
under Treasury symbol 0103.

The Science and Technology (S&T)  appropriation finances salaries; travel; science; technology; research
and development activities including laboratory and center supplies; certain operating expenses; grants;
contracts; intergovernmental agreements; and purchases of scientific equipment. These activities provide
the scientific basis for the Agency's regulatory actions.  In FY 2000, Superfund research costs were
appropriated in Superfund and transferred to S&T to allow for proper accounting of the costs. Scientific

   IV-24  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
and technological activities for environmental issues include Clean Air; Clean and Safe Water; Americans'
Right to Know About Their Environment; Better Waste Management; Preventing Pollution and Reducing
Risk in Communities, Homes, Workplaces, and Ecosystems; and Safe Food. The Science and Technology
appropriation is accounted for under Treasury symbol 0107.

The Environmental Programs and Management (EPM) includes funds for salaries; travel; contracts; grants
and cooperative agreements for pollution abatement, control and compliance activities; and administrative
activities of the operating programs. Areas supported from this appropriation include Clean Air; Clean and
Safe Water; Preventing  Pollution and Reducing Risk in Communities, Homes, Workplaces, and
Ecosystems; Better Waste Management, Restoration of Contaminated Waste Sites and Emergency
Response; Reduction of Global and Cross Border Environmental Risks; Americans' Right to Know About
Their Environment; Sound Science, Improved Understanding of Environmental Risk, and Greater
Innovation to Address Environmental Problems; a Credible Deterrent to Pollution and Greater Compliance
with the Law; and Effective Management. The Environmental Programs and Management appropriation is
accounted for under Treasury symbol 0108.

The Office of Inspector General appropriation provides funds for audit and investigative functions to
identify and recommend corrective actions on management and administrative deficiencies that create the
conditions for existing or potential instances of fraud, waste and mismanagement.  Additional funds for
audit and investigative activities associated with the Superfund Trust Fund and the Leaking Underground
Storage Tank Trust Fund are appropriated under those Trust Fund accounts and are transferred to  the
Office of Inspector General account. The audit function provides contract audit, internal and performance
audit, and financial  and grant audit services. The Office of Inspector General appropriation is accounted
for under Treasury  symbol 0112 and includes expenses incurred and reimbursed from the appropriated trust
funds being accounted for under Treasury symbols 8145 and 8153.

The Buildings and Facilities appropriation provides for the construction, repair, improvement, extension,
alteration, and purchase of fixed equipment or facilities that are owned or used by the Environmental
Protection Agency. The Buildings and Facilities appropriation is accounted for under Treasury symbol
0110.

The Payment to the Hazardous Substance Superfund appropriation authorizes appropriations from the
General Fund of the Treasury to finance activities conducted through Hazardous Substance Superfund.
Payment to the Hazardous Substance Superfund is accounted for under Treasury symbol 0250.

The Asbestos Loan Program was authorized by the Asbestos School Hazard Abatement  Act of 1986 to
finance control of asbestos building materials in schools.  Funds have not been appropriated for this
Program since FY 1993. For FY 1993 and FY1992, the program was funded by a subsidy appropriated
from the General Fund for the actual cost of financing the loans, and by borrowing from Treasury  for the
unsubsidized portion of the loan.  The Program fund disbursed the subsidy to the Financing fund as loans
were made, and disbursed administrative expenses to the providers.  The Financing fund received the
subsidy payment, borrowed from Treasury and disbursed loans  and collects the asbestos loans.  The
Asbestos Loan Program is accounted for under Treasury symbol 4322 for loans receivable and loan
collections on post FY 1991 loans; and under Treasury symbol 2917 for pre FY 1992  loans receivable and
loan collections.

The Program and Research Operations appropriation provides salaries and travel associated with
administering the operating programs within the Environmental Protection Agency. It incorporated
personnel, compensation and benefit costs and travel, exclusive of the Hazardous Substance Response
Trust Fund, the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund, the Office of Inspector General and the

                                                  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements   IV-25

-------
Oil Spill Response Trust Fund. In fiscal year 1996, Congress restructured the Agency's accounts. The
Program and Research Operations appropriation was eliminated. Activity remaining from prior fiscal year
appropriations is accounted for under Treasury symbol 0200. Unexpended authority for the Program and
Research Operations appropriation was canceled at the end of the fiscal year.

The FIFRA Revolving Fund was authorized by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
Amendments of 1998, as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996. Fees are paid by industry
to offset costs of accelerated reregistration, expedited processing of pesticides, and establishing tolerances
for pesticide chemicals in or on food and animal feed. The FIFRA Revolving Fund is accounted for under
Treasury symbol number 4310.

The Tolerance Revolving Fund was authorized in 1963 for the deposit of tolerance fees. Fees are paid by
industry for EPA to establish tolerances of pesticide chemicals in or on food and animal feed.  Effective
January 2, 1997, fees collected are now being deposited in the Reregistration and Expedited Processing
Revolving Fund (4310). The fees collected prior to this date are accounted for under Treasury symbol
number 4311.

The Working Capital Fund (WCF) includes two activities: computer support services and postage.  WCF
derives revenue from these activities based upon fee for services. WCF's customers currently consist solely
of Agency program  offices.  Accordingly, revenue generated by WCF and expenses recorded by the
program offices for  use of such services, along with the related advances/liabilities, are eliminated on
consolidation. The WCF is  accounted for under Treasury symbol 4565.

The Exxon Valdez Settlement Fund has funds available to carry out authorized environmental restoration
activities.  Funding is derived from the collection of reimbursements under the Exxon Valdez settlement as
a result of the oil spill. The  Exxon Valdez Settlement fund is accounted for under Treasury symbol number
5297.

Appropriations transferred to the Agency from other Federal agencies include funds from the Appalachian
Regional Commission and the Department of Commerce, which provide economic assistance to state and
local developmental activities; the Agency for International Development which provides assistance on
environmental matters at international levels; and from the General Services Administration, which provides
funds for rental of buildings, and operations, repairs, and maintenance of rental space.  The transfers
appropriations are accounted for under Treasury symbols 0200, 1010, 1021, 2050, and 4542.

Clearing Accounts include the Budgetary suspense account, Deposit in Transit differences, Unavailable
Check Cancellations and Overpayments, and Undistributed and Letter of Credit differences. Clearing
accounts are accounted for under Treasury symbols 3875 and 3880.

Deposit funds include Fees  for Ocean Dumping, Nonconformance Penalties, Suspense and payroll deposits
for Savings Bonds, and State and City Income Taxes Withheld.  Deposit funds are accounted for under
Treasury symbols 6050, 6264, 6265, 6266, 6275, 6500, and 6875.

General Fund Receipt Accounts include Hazardous Waste Permits; Miscellaneous Fines, Penalties and
Forfeitures; General Fund Interest; Interest from Credit Reform Financing Accounts; Fees and Other
Charges for Administrative and Professional Services; and Miscellaneous Recoveries and Refunds. General
Fund Receipt accounts are accounted for under Treasury symbols 0895, 1099, 1435, 1499, 2410, 3200, and
3220.
    IV-26   EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
The Environmental Services Receipt account was established for the deposit of fee receipts associated with
environmental programs, including radon measurement proficiency ratings and training, motor vehicle
engine certifications, and water pollution permits. Receipts in this special fund will be appropriated to the
S&T appropriation and to the EPM appropriation to meet the expenses of the programs that generate the
receipts.  Environmental Services are unavailable receipts accounted for under Treasury symbol 5295.

The Miscellaneous  Contributed Funds Trust Fund includes gifts for pollution control programs that are
usually designated for a specific use by the donor and deposits from pesticide registrants to cover the costs
of petition hearings when such hearings result in unfavorable decisions to the petitioner.  Miscellaneous
Contributed Funds Trust Fund is accounted for under Treasury symbol 8741.

The accompanying financial statements include the accounts of all funds described in this note. The
expense allocation methodology is a financial statement estimate that presents EPA's programs at full cost.
Superfund may charge some costs directly to the fund and charge the remainder of the costs to the All
Other Funds in the Agency-wide appropriations.  These amounts are presented as Expenses from Other
Appropriations on  the Statement of Net Cost and as Income from Other Appropriations  on the Statement
of Changes in Net Position and the Statement of Financing.

The Superfund Trust Fund is allocated general support services costs (such as rent, communications,
utilities,  mail operations, etc.) that were initially charged to the Agency's S&T and EPM appropriations.
During the year, these  costs are allocated from the S&T and EPM appropriations to the Superfund Trust
Fund based on a ratio  of direct labor hours, using budgeted or actual full-time equivalent personnel charged
to these appropriations, to the total of all direct labor hours. Agency general support services cost charges
to the Superfund Trust Fund may not exceed the ceilings established in the Superfund Trust Fund
appropriation.  The related general support services costs charged to the Superfund Trust Funds was  $56.3
million for FY 2000.

C. Budgets and Budgetary Accounting

Superfiind

Congress adopts an annual appropriation amount to be available until expended for the Superfund Trust
Fund. A transfer account for the Superfund Trust Fund has been  established for purposes of carrying out
the program activities.  As the Agency disburses obligated amounts from the transfer account, the Agency
draws down monies from the Superfund Trust Fund at Treasury to cover the amounts being disbursed.

All Other Funds

Congress adopts an annual appropriation amount for the LUST Trust Fund and for the Oil Spill Response
Trust Fund to  remain available until expended. A transfer account for the LUST Trust Fund has been
established for purposes of carrying out the program activities. As the Agency disburses obligated amounts
from the transfer account, the Agency draws down monies from the LUST Trust Fund at Treasury to cover
the amounts being  disbursed. The Agency draws down all the appropriated monies from  the Treasury's Oil
Spill Liability trust fund to the Oil Spill Response Trust Fund when Congress adopts the appropriation
amount.  Congress  adopts an annual appropriation for STAG, Buildings and Facilities, and for Payments to
the Hazardous Substance Superfund to be available until expended; adopts annual appropriation for S&T,
EPM and for the Office of Inspector General to be available for two fiscal years. When the appropriations
for the General Funds  are enacted, Treasury issues a warrant to the respective appropriations.  As the
Agency disburses obligated amounts, the balance of funds available to the appropriation is reduced at
Treasury.

                                                  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-27

-------
The Asbestos Loan Program is a commercial activity financed by a combination from two sources:  one for
the long term cost of the loan and another for the remaining non-subsidized portion of the loan.  The long
term costs are defined as the net present value of the estimated cash flows associated with the loans. The
portion of each loan disbursement that does not represent long term cost is financed under a permanent
indefinite borrowing authority established with the Treasury.  The annual appropriation bill limits the
amount of obligations that can be made for direct loans.  A permanent indefinite appropriation is available
to finance the costs of subsidy re-estimates that occur after the year in which the loan is disbursed.  No
appropriation was adopted by Congress for FY 2000; therefore, there was no new financing available to the
Asbestos Loan Program for FY 2000.

Funding of the FIFRA and the Tolerance Revolving Funds is provided by fees collected from industry to
offset costs incurred by the Agency in carrying out these programs.  Each year the Agency submits an
apportionment request to OMB based on the anticipated collections of industry fees.

Funding of the WCF is provided by fees collected from other Agency appropriations collected to offset
costs incurred for providing the Agency administrative support for computer support services and postage.

Funds transferred from other Federal agencies  is funded by a non expenditure transfer of funds from the
other Federal agencies. As the Agency disburses the obligated amounts, the balance of funding available to
the transfer appropriation is reduced at Treasury.

Clearing accounts, Deposit accounts, and Receipt accounts receive no budget. The  amounts are recorded to
the Clearing and Deposit accounts pending further disposition.  Amounts recorded  to the Receipt accounts
capture amounts receivable to or collected for the General Fund of the U.S. Treasury.

D. Basis of Accounting

Super fund and All Other Funds

Transactions are recorded on an accrual accounting basis and on a budgetary basis (where budgets are
issued). Under the accrual method, revenues are recognized when earned and expenses are recognized
when a liability is incurred, without regard to receipt or payment of cash. Budgetary accounting facilitates
compliance with legal constraints and controls over the use of Federal funds.  All interfund balances and
transactions have been eliminated.

E.  Revenues and Other Financing Sources

Superfund

The Superfund receives most funding needed to support the program through appropriations that may be
used within statutory limits,  for operating and capital expenditures (primarily equipment). Additional
financing for the Superfund Trust Fund is obtained through reimbursements from other Federal agencies,
from States for State  Cost Share, and from potentially responsible parties (PRPs) for future costs. Revenues
collected through cost recovery are deposited with the  Trust fund at Treasury.

All Other Funds

The majority of All Other Funds appropriations receive funding needed to support programs through
appropriations, which may be used, within statutory limits, for operating and capital expenditures. Under
Credit Reform provisions, the Asbestos Loan Program received funding to support  the subsidy cost of loans

    IV-28  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
through appropriations which may be used with statutory limits. The Asbestos Direct Loan Financing fund,
an off-budget fund, receives additional funding to support the loan disbursements through collections from
the Program fund for the subsidized portion of the loan and through borrowing from Treasury for the non-
subsidized portion. The last year Congress provided appropriations for this fund was 1993, accordingly, no
new funding has been available for this program.  The FIFRA and the Tolerance Revolving Funds receive
funding, which is now deposited with the FIFRA Revolving Fund, through fees collected for services
provided.  The FIFRA Revolving Fund also receives interest on invested funds. The WCF receives revenue
through fees collected for services provided to Agency program offices. Such revenue is eliminated with
related Agency program expenses on Consolidation. The Exxon Valdez Settlement Fund received funding
through reimbursements.

Appropriations are recognized as Other Financing Sources when earned, i.e., when goods and services have
been rendered without regard to payment of cash. Other revenues are recognized when earned, i.e., when
services have been rendered.

F. Funds with the Treasury

Super fund and All Other Funds

The Agency does not maintain cash in commercial bank accounts. Cash receipts and disbursements are
handled by Treasury.  The funds maintained with Treasury are Appropriated Funds, Revolving Funds and
Trust Funds. These funds have balances available to pay current liabilities and finance authorized purchase
commitments.

G. Investments in U.S. Government Securities

Superfund and All Other Funds

Investments in U.S. Government securities are maintained by Treasury and are reported at amortized cost
net of unamortized discounts. Discounts are amortized over the term of the investments and reported as
interest income. Investments are held to maturity, unless  they are needed to finance operations of the fund.

H. Securities Received in Settlement

Superfund

During FY 1993 and FY 1996, the Agency received  marketable equity securities, valued at a total $5,146
thousand of which $5,127 thousand are still held, from a  company in settlement of Superfund cost recovery
actions. The Agency records marketable securities at cost as of the date of receipt. Marketable securities are
held by Treasury and reported at their cost value in the financial statements until sold.

I.  Accounts Receivable and Interest Receivable

Superfund

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended by
the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act  (SARA), provides for the recovery of costs from
potentially responsible parties (PRPs).  However, cost  recovery expenditures are expensed when incurred
since there is no assurance that these funds will be recovered.
                                                  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-29

-------
It is the Agency's policy to record accounts receivable from PRPs for Superfund site response costs when a
consent decree, judgment, administrative order, or settlement is entered.  These agreements are generally
negotiated after site response costs have been incurred. It is the Agency's position that until a consent
decree or other form of settlement is obtained, the amount recoverable should not be recorded.

The Agency also records accounts receivable from states for a percentage of Superfund site remedial action
costs incurred by the Agency within those states.  As agreed to under Superfund State Contracts (SSCs),
cost sharing arrangements under SSCs may vary according to whether a site was privately or publicly
operated at the time of hazardous substance disposal and whether the Agency response action was removal
or remedial. SSC agreements are usually for 10% or 50% of site remedial action costs. States may pay the
full amount of their share in advance, or incrementally throughout the remedial action process. Allowances
for uncollectible state cost share receivables have not been recorded, because the Agency has not had
collection problems with these agreements.

 All Other Funds

The majority of receivables for All Other Funds represent interest receivable for Asbestos and FIFRA and
both accounts receivable and interest receivable to the General Fund of the Treasury.

J. Loans Receivable

All Other Funds

Loans are accounted for as receivables after funds have been disbursed. Loans receivable resulting from
obligations  on or before September 30, 1991, are  reduced by the allowance for uncollectible loans. Loans
receivable resulting from loans obligated on or after October 1, 1991, are reduced by an allowance equal to
the present value of the subsidy costs associated with these loans. The subsidy cost is calculated based on
the interest rate differential between the loans and Treasury borrowing, the estimated delinquencies and
defaults net of recoveries  offset by fees collected and other estimated cash flows associated with these loans.

K. Appropriated Amounts Held by Treasury

Superfund and All Other Funds

For the Superfund and LUST Trust Funds, and for amounts appropriated to the Office of Inspector
General from the Superfund and LUST Trust Funds, cash available to the Agency that is not needed
immediately for current disbursements remains in the respective Trust Funds managed by Treasury.  At the
end of FY 2000 approximately  $2.7 billion  remained in the Treasury managed Superfund Trust Fund and
approximately $86.2 million remained in the LUST Trust Fund to meet the Agency's disbursement needs.

L. Advances and Prepayments

Superfund and All Other Funds

Advances and prepayments represent funds advanced or prepaid to other entities both internal and external
to the Agency for which a budgetary expenditure has not yet occurred.
    IV-30   EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
M. Property, Plant, and Equipment

Super fund and All Other Funds

The Fixed Assets Subsystem (FAS) implemented in FY 1997 maintains EPA-held personal and real property
records.  The FAS automatically generates depreciation entries monthly based upon the acquisition date.
Purchases of EPA-held and contractor-held personal equipment are capitalized if the equipment is valued at
$25 thousand or more and has an estimated useful life of at least two years. Prior to implementing FAS,
depreciation was taken on a modified straight-line basis over a period of six years depreciating 10% the first
and sixth year, and 20% in years two through five.  All EPA-held personal equipment purchased before the
implementation of FAS was assumed to have an estimated  useful life of five years.  New acquisitions of
EPA-held personal equipment are depreciated using the straight-line method  over the specific assets' useful
lives, ranging from two to 15 years.

Real property consists of land, buildings, and capital and leasehold improvements.  Real property, other than
land,  is capitalized when  the value is $75 thousand or more. Land is capitalized regardless of cost.
Buildings are valued at an estimated original cost basis, and land is valued at fair market value. Depreciation
for real property is calculated using the straight-line method over the specific  assets' useful lives, ranging
from 10 to 102 years.  Leasehold improvements are amortized over the lesser of their useful lives or the
unexpired lease terms. In addition to property and improvements not meeting the capitalization criteria,
expenditures for minor alterations, and repairs and maintenance are expensed as incurred.

N. Liabilities

Superfund and All Other Funds

Liabilities represent the amount of monies or other resources that are likely to be paid by the Agency as the
result of a transaction  or event that has already occurred. However, no liability can be paid by the Agency
without an appropriation  or other collection of revenue for services provided. Liabilities for which an
appropriation has not  been enacted are classified as unfunded liabilities and there is no certainty that the
appropriations will be  enacted. Liabilities of the Agency, arising from other than contracts, can be
abrogated by the Government acting in its sovereign capacity.

O. Borrowing Payable  to the Treasury

All Other Funds

Borrowing payable to Treasury results from loans from Treasury to fund the Asbestos direct loans described
in part B and C of this note.  Periodic principal payments are made to Treasury based on the collections of
loans receivable.

P. Interest Payable to Treasury

All Other Funds

The Asbestos Loan Program makes periodic interest payments to Treasury based on its debt to Treasury.
At the end of FY 2000, there was no outstanding interest payable to Treasury since payment was made
through September 30.
                                                   EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-31

-------
Q.  Accrued Unfunded Annual Leave

Superfund and All Other Funds

Annual, sick and other leave is expensed as taken during the fiscal year. Sick and other leave earned but not
taken is not accrued as a liability. Annual leave and compensation time in lieu of overtime earned but not
taken as of the end of the fiscal year are accrued  as an unfunded liability. Accrued unfunded leave is
included in the Statement of Financial Position as a component of "Other Liabilities-Governmental." As of
September 30, 2000, the unfunded leave liability  for the Superfund Trust Fund was $19.6 million and for All
Other Funds was $93.2 million.

R.  Retirement Plan

Superfund and All Other Funds

The majority of the Agency's employees participate in the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS), to which
the Agency contributes 8.51% and employees contribute 7.40% (as of January 1, 2000) of base pay.

On January 1, 1987, the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) went into effect pursuant to Public
Law 99-335. Most employees hired after December 31, 1983, are automatically covered by FERS and Social
Security. Employees hired prior to January 1, 1984, were allowed to either join FERS and Social Security or
remain in CSRS. A primary feature of FERS is that it offers a savings plan to the Agency employees which
automatically contributes 1  percent of pay and matches any employee contribution up to an additional 4
percent of pay.  For most employees hired  after December 31, 1983, the Agency also contributes the
employer's matching share for Social Security.

With the issuance of "Accounting for Liabilities of the Federal Government" (SFFAS-5), which was
effective for the FY 1997 financial statements, accounting and reporting standards were established for
liabilities relating to the Federal employee benefit programs (Retirement, Health Benefits and Life
Insurance). SFFAS-5 requires that employing agencies recognize the cost of pensions and other retirement
benefits during their employees' active years of service.  SFFAS-5 requires that the Office of Personnel
Management, as administrator of the Civil Service Retirement and Federal Employees Retirement Systems,
the Federal Employees Health Benefits  Program, and the Federal Employees Group Life Insurance
Program, provides EPA with the "Cost Factors" to compute EPA's liability for each program.

S. Cost Accounting

Superfund and All Other Funds

EPA has designated the Goals, Objectives and Sub-objectives of the Agency's Strategic Plan prepared under
the Government Performance and Results  Act (GPRA) as the Agency's "products and services." Under the
GPRA structure, each expenditure from obligations made using new obligational authority (NOA) in FY
1999 forward is made at the Goal, Objective, Sub-objective level that is part of the Program Results Code
(PRC).  EPA's senior management made the decision not to "recast" resources under the old Program
Element (PE) structure to the GPRA structure.  However, the program offices where these PEs were
obligated and disbursed cross walked the expenses to the appropriate Goal(s). Most of the PEs can be
traced directly to a Goal and in those cases where PEs crossed Goals, the allocation of expenses was done
on a reasonable and consistent basis.
   IV-32  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
Program Performance Grants (PPGs) allow state and interstate agencies to combine two or more
environmental program grants into one grant. PPGs are performance based and the States are accountable
for performance but not for detailed accounting as to how funds are spent.  These grants may cover several
Goals. EPA grant project officers in discussion with States align the grant work plan with  the GPRA
structure.  Accounting at the  Goal level is based on expected performance as outlined in the work plan.
Adjustments are made to the accounting only if the actual performance varies materially from the grant
work plan.

Activities occurring in Goal 10 are for the administrative functions necessary for a federal agency to support
its complex and wide reaching programs.  These activities are not directly charged to the Agency's
environmental programs.  For the Statement of Net Cost by Goal, the costs in Goal 10 are allocated to
Goals 1 thru 9 based  on the total Full Time Equivalents (FTE) within each Goal. The Goal 10 agency-wide
costs are allocated based on the total FTE in each of the Goals; costs associated with regional support are
allocated based on Regional FTE in each Goal.

Note 2. Fund Balances with Treasury

Fund Balances with Treasury as of September 30, 2000, consists of the following (in thousands):

                             Entity       Non-
                             Assets       Assets        Total
    Trust Funds:
      Superfund            $   37,397   $         0  $     37,397
       LUST                     1,300             0         1,300
       Oil Spill                   3,106             0         3,106
    Revolving Funds:
      FIFRA                    5,442             0         5,442
      Tolerance                    22             0           22
       Working Capital          52,509             0        52,509
    Appropriated Funds      10,913,47             0    10,913,471
    Other Fund Types         76.338        7.068        83.406
           Total          $ 11,089,58   $    7,068  $ 11,096,653

Entity fund balances include  balances that are available to pay current liabilities and to finance authorized
purchase commitments.  Also, entity assets, Other Fund Types consist of the Environmental Services
Receipt account. The Environmental Services Receipt account is a special fund receipt account.  Upon
Congress appropriating the funds, EPA will use the receipts in the Science and Technology appropriation
and the Environmental Programs and Management appropriation.

The  non-entity Other Fund Type consist of deposit funds.  The deposit funds are awaiting documentation
for the determination of proper accounting disposition.

NoteS. Cash

In All Others, as of September 30, 2000, Cash consisted of imprest funds totaling $48 thousand.
                                                   EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-33

-------
Note 4. Investments

As of September 30, 2000, investments consisted of the following:

     Amounts for Balance
                                      Unamortized
                                        (Premium)       Interest      Investment       Market
    Superfund
    Intragovernmental

      Non-Marketable       $ 4,126,45    $   166,180   $ _ 42   $    3,960,313   $  3,960,313
    All Others
    Intragovernmental

      Non-Marketable       $ 1,669,66    $    76,334  J _ 2Ł   $    1,593,357   $  1,593,357

CERCLA, as amended by SARA, authorizes EPA to recover monies to clean up Superfund sites from
responsible parties (RP). Some RPs file for bankruptcy under Title 11  of the U.S. Code. In bankruptcy
settlements, EPA is an unsecured creditor and is entitled to receive a percentage of the assets remaining
after secured creditors have been satisfied. Some RPs satisfy their debts by issuing marketable securities in
the reorganized company.  The Agency does not intend to exercise ownership rights to these securities, and
instead will convert these securities to cash as soon as practicable.

Note 5. Accoun ts R eceiva ble

The Accounts Receivable for September 30, 2000, consist of the following:

                                 Superfund       All
   Intragovernmental Assets:
   Accounts & Interest Receivable  $   40.671    $  34.371
         Total                    $   40,671    $  34,371
   Governmental Assets:
   Unbilled Accounts Receivable   $   88,209    $       0
   Accounts & Interest Receivable    883,938      155,581
   Less: Allowance for Doubtful     r355.108^      f6
         Total                    $  617,039    $  87,895

Accounts receivable due from other Federal agencies are considered fully collectible.

The Allowance for Doubtful Accounts is determined on a specific identification basis as a result of a case-
by-case review of receivables at the regional level, and a reserve on a percentage basis for those not
specifically identified.

The Accounts Receivable amount above includes a Superfund penalty amount of $638.6 thousand that was
applied and posted late in FY 2000.  The agency believes that collection of this amount is not likely.  Had
the penalty been applied earlier in the year, the Allowance for Doubtful Accounts would have been adjusted
upward by $479 thousand to account for the low likelihood of collection.

   IV-34 EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
Note 6. Other Assets

Other Assets for September 30, 2000, consist of the following

                                              Superfund     All
                                             Trust Fund   Others
Combined  Intra-agency Consolidated
  Totals    Eliminations    Totals
$ 15,279 1
6,510
0
$ 21,789 $
$ (18) J
0
0
767
1
0
0
$ 750 $
; 7,409
0
43
i 7,452 :
; (916)
599
1,945
75
0
(2)
11
» 1,712 :
$ 22,688 }
6,510
43
$ 29,241 5
$ (934) }
599
1,945
842
1
(2)
11
$ 2,462 ^
f 0 $
(6,510)
0
J (6,510) $
f 0 $
0
0


0
0
5 0 $
22,688
0
43
; 22,731
(934)
599
1,945
842
1
(2)
11
; 2,462
Intragovernmental Assets:
  Advances to Federal Agencies
  Advances to Working Capital Fund
  Advances for Postage
Total Intragovernmental Assets

Governmental Assets:
  Travel Advances
  Letter of Credit Advances
  Grant Advances
  Other Advances
  Bank Card Payments
  Deposit on Returnable Containers
  Prepaid Rent
Total Governmental Assets

Note 7. Loans Receivable, Net - Non-Federal

Asbestos Loan Program loans disbursed from obligations made prior to FY 1992 are net of an allowance for
estimated uncollectible loans, if an allowance was considered necessary. Loans disbursed from obligations made
after FY 1991 are governed by the Federal Credit Reform Act. The Act mandates that the present value of the
subsidy costs (i.e., interest rate differentials, interest subsidies, anticipated delinquencies, and defaults) associated with
direct loans be recognized as an expense in the year the loan is made. The net present value of loans is the amount of
the gross loan receivable less the present value of the subsidy.

An analysis of loans receivable and the nature and amounts of the subsidy and administrative expenses associated
entirely with Asbestos Loan Program loans as of September 30, 2000, is provided in the following sections.
Loans
Receivable,
Gross
$ 58,114
46,909
$ 105,023
Allowance*
$ 0
(15,895)
$ (15,895)
Value of
Assets Related
to Direct Loans
$ 58,114
31,014
$ 89,128
    Direct Loans Obligated Prior to FY 1992
    Direct Loans Obligated After FY 1991
        Total
        *  Allowance for Pre-Credit Reform loans (Prior to FY 1992) is the Allowance for Estimated Uncollectible
        Loans and the Allowance for Post Credit Reform Loans (After FY 1991) is the Allowance for Subsidy Cost
        (present value).
                                                       EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-35

-------
Subsidy Expenses for Post Credit Reform Loans:
                                     Interest     Expected      Fee
                                   Differential    Defaults    Offsets     Total
    Direct Loan Subsidy Expense
2.640    $
0    $    0    $  2.640
Note 8. Inventory and Property Received in Settlement, Net

The Inventory and Related Property at September 30, 2000, consisted of the following:

                                                                    Superfund   All Other
    Operating Materials and Supplies Held for Use in Normal Operations   $        0   $      306
    Securities Received in Settlement                                         5,086    	41
        Total                                                        $    5.086   $      347

The securities represent assets received during a bankruptcy proceeding.  The Agency does not intend to exercise
ownership rights related to these securities, and instead will convert these securities to  cash as soon as practicable.

Note 9. General Plant, Property and Equipment

Superfund property, plant and equipment, consists of personal property items held by contractors and the Agency.
EPA also has property funded by various other Agency appropriations. The property  funded by these appropriations
are presented in the aggregate under "All Others" and consists of real, EPA-Held and  Contractor-Held personal, and
capitalized-leased property.

Purchases of EPA-Held and Contractor-Held personal property are capitalized if the equipment is valued at $25
thousand or more and has an estimated useful life  of at least two years. Software is capitalized if the  purchase price is
$100 thousand or more for a revenue generating activity, such as the Working Capital Fund, and has  an estimated
useful life of at least two years.  The Agency depreciates EPA-Held personal property using a straight-line method
over the asset's useful life ranging from two to 15 years. Contractor-Held personal property is depreciated over five
years using a modified straight-line method. Real property, other than land, is capitalized when the value is $75
thousand or more and is depreciated using the straight-line method over  the specific asset's useful life ranging from
10 to 102 years. Land is capitalized regardless of cost.  Leasehold improvements are amortized over  the lesser of their
useful lives or the unexpired lease term.

As of September 30, 2000, Plant, Property and Equipment consisted of the following:
                                  Superfund
                                   All Others
Acquisition Accumulated Net Book Acquisition Accumulated Net Book
Value Depreciation Value Value Depreciation Value
EPA-Held
Equipment $
Software
Contractor-Held
Equipment
Land and
Buildings
Capital Leases
Total $

24,733
0

8,814

0
0
33,547

$ (16,313) $
0

(3,653)

0
0
$ (19,966) ^

f 8,420 !
0

5,161

0
0
f 13,581 !

I 134,893 $
550

34,103

461,817
40,992
I 672,355 $

(86,883)
0

(27,551)

(73,430)
(11,463)
(199,327)

$ 48,010
550

6,552

388,387
29,529
$ 473,028
    IV-36  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
Note 10. Debt

The Debt consisted of the following as of September 30, 2000:

                            Beginning     Net      Ending
   All Others                Balance  Borrowing   Balance
   Other Debt:
   Debt to Treasury          $   37.922  $	0  $   37.922
   Classification of Debt:
     Intra-governmental Debt                         $   37,922
      Total                                        $   37.922

Note 11. Custodial Liability

Custodial Liability represent the amount of net accounts receivable that, when collected, will be deposited to the
General Fund of the Treasury. Included in the custodial liability are amounts for fines and penalties, interest
assessments, repayments of loans, and miscellaneous other accounts receivable.

Note 12. Other Liabilities

The Other Liabilities, both intragovernmental and non-Federal, for September 30, 2000, are as follows:

   Other Liabilities - Intragovernmental         Covered by          Not Covered by
                                           Budgetary Resources  Budgetary Resources    Total
   Superfund - Current
      Employer Contributions & Payroll Taxes        $          2,900      $               0  $    2,900
      Other Advances                                       1,681                     0       1,681
      Advances, HRSTF Cashout                             2,414                     0       2,414
      Deferred HRSTF Cashout                                437                     0         437
      Resources Payable to Treasury                              61                     0          61
   Superfund - Non-Current
      Unfunded FECA Liability                     	0      	1,355       1,355
     Total Superfund                             $	7.493      $	1.355  I    8.848
   All Other - Current
      Employer Contributions & Payroll Taxes        $          12,690      $               0  $   12,690
      WCF Advances                                        6,510                     0       6,510
      Other Advances                                       3,638                     0       3,638
      Liability for Deposit Funds                                (20)                     0         (20)
      Resources Payable to Treasury                             (33)                     0         (33)
   All Other - Non-Current
      Unfunded FECA Liability                     	0      	6,064       6,064
     Total All Other                              $	22.785      $	6.064  $   28.849
                                                     EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-37

-------
    Other Liabilities - Non-Federal

    Superfund - Current
      Accrued Funded Payroll and Benefits
      Accrued Funded Annual Leave
      Payroll Check Cancellation Liability
      Unearned Advances, Non- Federal
      Accrued Unfunded Annual Leave
    Total Superfund

    Other Liabilities - Non-Federal

    All Other - Current
      Accrued Funded Payroll and Benefits
      Withholdings Payable
      Accrued Funded Annual Leave
      Payroll Check Cancellation Liability
      Unearned Advances, Non- Federal
      Liability for Deposit Funds
      Accrued Unfunded Annual Leave
    All Other - Non-Current
      Capital Lease Liability
         Total All Other
     Covered by          Not Covered by
Budgetary Resources  Budgetary Resources     Total
                7,499
                5,777
                    3
               30,192
                    0
     0  $     7,499
     0
     0
     0
19,553
               43.471
19.553
     Covered by          Not Covered by
Budgetary Resources  Budgetary Resources
               32,570
               25,278
                  320
                   44
                4,729
                6,833
                    0

                    0
     0
     0
     0
     0
     0
     0
93,151

37.585
               69.774
Note 13. Leases

The Capital Leases as of September 30, 2000, consist of the following:

Capital Leases:
    Summary of Assets Under Capital Lease:
    Land, Buildings and Personal Property
    Accumulated Amortization
                          All Others
                          $  40.992
                          $  11.463
               5,777
                  3
              30,192
              19,553
              63.024
           Total

              32,570
              25,278
                320
                 44
               4,729
               6,833
              93,151

	       37.585
 130.736  $   200.510
EPA has three capital leases for land and buildings housing scientific laboratories and/or computer facilities. All of
these leases include a base rental charge and escalator clauses based upon either rising operating costs and/or real
estate taxes.  The base operating costs are adjusted annually according to escalators in the Consumer Price Indices
published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (U.S. Department of Labor).  EPA has one capital lease for a xerox
copier, at a net present value of $78 thousand, that expires in FY 2002. The three real property leases terminate in
fiscal years 2010, 2013 and 2025.  The charges are expended out of the Environmental Programs and Management
(EPM) appropriation. The total future minimum lease payments of the capital leases are listed  below.
    IV-38  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
    Future Payments Due:                            All Others
    Fiscal Year
    2001                                           $      6,314
    2002                                                  6,303
    2003                                                  6,295
    2004                                                  6,295
    2005                                                  6,295
    After 5 Years                                         96,194
    Total Future Minimum  Lease Payments                127,696
    Less: Imputed Interest                                (90,111)
    Net Capital Lease Liability                     $     37,585
    Liabilities not Covered by
    Budgetary Resources (See Note 10)             $     37,585

Operating Leases:

The General Services Administration (GSA) provides leased real property (land and buildings) as office space for
EPA employees. GSA charges a Standard Level Users Charge that approximates the commercial rental rates for
similar properties.

EPA has five direct operating leases for land and buildings housing scientific laboratories and/or computer facilities
during FY 2000.  In FY 2000 EPA also entered into a one year lease for the dockage of EPA's research vessel "Peter
W. Anderson" and warehouse storage of equipment that expires May  31, 2001. Most of these leases include a base
rental charge and escalator clauses based upon either rising operating costs and/or real estate taxes. The base
operating costs are adjusted annually according to escalators in the Consumer Price Indices published by the Bureau
of Labor Statistics (U.S. Department of Labor).  One of these leases, which expired on September 30, 2000, was
succeeded by a GSA lease agreement for the same space. Two of these leases, which were to terminate during FY
2000, were extended to fiscal years 2002 and 2020. In fiscal year 1997 and 1998, EPA entered into two leases, which
terminate in fiscal 2017 and 2003 respectively. The charges are expended out of the EPM appropriation. The total
minimum  future costs of operating leases are listed below.

                                                                          Total Land
    Fiscal Year                         Superfund        All Others      & Buildings
    2001                             $          0        $    5,427       $     5,427
    2002                                        0             2,082             2,082
    2003                                        0                 84                84
    2004                                        0                 74                74
    2005                                        0                 74                74
    Beyond 2006                       	0_              994               994
    Total Future Minimum
    Lease Payments                 $	0_      $    8.735       $     8.735

Note 14.  Pension and Other Actuarial Liabilities

FECA provides income and medical cost protection to covered Federal civilian employees injured on the job,
employees who have incurred a work-related occupational disease, and beneficiaries of employees whose death is
attributable to a job-related injury or occupational disease. Annually, EPA is allocated the portion of the long term
FECA actuarial liability attributable to the entity.  The liability is calculated to estimate the expected liability for death,
disability, medical and miscellaneous costs for approved compensation cases. The liability amounts and the
calculation methodologies are provided by DOL.


                                                      EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-39

-------
The FECA Actuarial Liability at September 30, 2000, consisted of the following:
     FECA Actuarial Liability
Superfund
 $   6.637
                                                   All Other
                                                     27.036
The FY 2000 present value of these estimates was calculated using a discount rate of 5.5 percent in years 1 and 2, 5.55
percent in year 3 and 5.6 percent in year 4 and thereafter. The estimated future costs are recorded as an unfunded
liability.

Note 15. Cashout Advances and Deferrals, Superfund

Cashouts are funds received by EPA, a state, or another Potentially Responsible Party under the terms of a settlement
agreement (e.g., consent decree) to finance response action costs at a specified Superfund site.  Under CERCLA
Section 122(b)(3), cashout funds received by EPA are placed in site-specific, interest bearing accounts known as
special accounts and are used in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement. Funds placed in special
accounts may be used without further appropriation by Congress.

Note 16. Unexpended Appropriations

As of September 30, 2000, the Unexpended Appropriations consisted of the following:
                                             Superfund     All Others
                                               Total

                                           1,518,675
                                              83,396
                                           8.517.767
                 _Q_  $  10.119.838    $  10.119.838
o 1
0
0
; 1,518,675
83,396
8,517,767
     Unexpended Appropriations:
       Unobligated
        Available
        Unavailable
      Undelivered Orders
         Total

Note 17. Amounts Held by Treasury

Amounts Held by Treasury for Future Appropriations consists of amounts held in trusteeship by the U.S.
Department of Treasury in the "Hazardous Substance Superfund Trust Fund" (Superfund) and the "Leaking
Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund" (LUST).

Superfund (Audited)

Superfund is supported primarily by an environmental tax on corporations, cost recoveries of funds spent to clean up
hazardous waste sites, and fines and penalties.  Prior to December 31, 1995, the fund was also supported by other
taxes on crude and petroleum and on the sale or use of certain chemicals.  The authority to assess those taxes and the
environmental tax on  corporations also expired on December 31, 1995, and has not been renewed by Congress.  It is
not known if or when such taxes will be reassessed in the future.

The following reflects the Superfund Trust Fund maintained by the U.S. Department of Treasury as of September 30,
2000. The amounts contained in these statements have been provided by the Treasury and are audited. Outlays
represent amounts received by EPA's Superfund Trust Fund; such funds are eliminated on consolidation with the
Superfund Trust Fund maintained by Treasury.
    IV-40  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
                                           EPA
                  Treasury
               Combined
    Undistributed Balances
     Available for Investment
     Unavailable for Investment
    Total Undisbursed Balance
    Interest Receivables
    Investments, Net of Discounts
         Total Assets
    Liabilities & Equity
    Debt
    Equity
         Total Liability and Equity
    Receipts
     Petroleum-Imported
     Petroleum-Domestic
     Crude and Petroleum
     Certain Chemicals
     Imported Substances
     Corporate Environmental
     Cost Recoveries
     Fines & Penalties
    Total Revenue
    Appropriations Received
    Interest Income
         Total Receipts
    Outlays
     Transfers to EPA
        Total Outlays
    Net Income
    2,770,969
    1,628,891
    1,628,891
    1.628.891
                      1,986
                          0
                      1,986
                         43
 1,189,301
                        176
                          2
                       (561)
                      2,166
                        606
                      2,679
                    230,508
                        725
                    236,301
                    700,000
                    235,740
 1,172,041

(1,628,891)
(1,628,891)
 f456.850)
                     1,986
                         0
                     1,986
                       43
 3,960,270
$   2.770.969   $   1.191.330    $   3.962.299
$          0   $          0    $          0
    2,770,969       1,191,330        3,962,299
$   2.770.969   $   1.191.330    $   3.962.299
                      176
                        2
                     (561)
                     2,166
                      606
                     2,679
                   230,508
                      725
                   236,301
                   700,000
                   235,740
                                   1,172,041
	0
 1.172.041
LUST (Audited)

LUST is supported primarily by a sales tax on motor fuels to clean up LUST waste sites. The following represents
LUST Trust Fund as maintained by the U.S. Department of Treasury.  The amounts contained in these statements
have been provided by Treasury and are audited. Outlays represent appropriations received by EPA's LUST Trust
Fund; such funds are eliminated on consolidation with the LUST Trust Fund maintained by Treasury.
                                                      EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-41

-------
                                            EPA      Treasury      Combined
    Undistributed Balances
     Available for Investment        $          0   $       (725)    $       (725)
     Unavailable for Investment       	0    	0     	0
    Total Undisbursed Balance                   0           (725)            (725)
    Taxes Receivable                            0            221             221
    Interest Receivables                	0    	26     	26
    Investments, Net of Discounts           86,283       1,506,348        1,592,631
         Total Assets                $     86.283   $   1.505.870    $   1.592.153

    Liabilities & Equity
    Accrued Liabilities                $          0   $       2,892    $      2,892
    Equity                                 86,283       1,502,978        1,589,261
         Total Liability and Equity    $     86.283   $   1.505.870    $   1.592.153

    Receipts
     Highway TF Tax                $          0   $    172,659    $    172,659
     Airport TF Tax                            0         16,380          16,380
     Inland TF Tax                             0            612             612
     Audit Adjustment                	0         (1,710)          (1,710)
     Gross Revenue                            0        187,941         187,941
     Less:  Reimbursement to
         General Fund                	0         (6,625)          (6,625)
    Net Revenue                                0        181,316         181,316
    Interest Income                   	0         78,956          78,956
         Net Receipts                 	0        260,272         260,272

    Outlays
     Transfers to EPA                     65,718        (65,718)     	0
        Total Outlays                      65,718        (65,718)     	0
    Net Income                      $     65.718   $    194.554    $    260.272

Note 18. Commitments and Contingencies

EPA is a party in various administrative proceedings, legal actions and claims brought by or against it. These include:

        Various personnel actions, suits, or claims brought against the Agency by employees and others.

        Various contract and assistance program claims brought  against the Agency by vendors, grantees and others.

        The legal recovery of Superfund costs incurred for pollution cleanup of specific sites, to include the
        collection of fines and penalties from responsible parties.

        Claims against recipients for improperly spent assistance funds which may be settled by a reduction of future
        EPA funding to the grantee or the provision of additional grantee matching funds.
    IV-42  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
Superfund

Under CERCLA *106(a), EPA issues administrative orders that require parties to clean up contaminated sites.
CERCLA »106(b) allows a party that has complied with such an order to petition EPA for reimbursement from the
Fund of its reasonable costs of responding to the order, plus interest. To be eligible for reimbursement, the party
must demonstrate either that it was not a liable party under CERCLA *107(a) for the response action ordered, or that
the Agency's selection of the response action was arbitrary and capricious or otherwise not in accordance with law.

There are currently nine CERCLA »106(b) administrative claims and four pending lawsuits.  If the claimants are
successful, the total losses on the administrative and judicial claims could amount to approximately $32.6 million and
$5.7 million, respectively. The Environmental Appeals Board has not yet issued final decisions on the administrative
claims; therefore, a definite estimate of the amount of the  contingent loss cannot be made. The claimants' chance of
success in all nine of these outstanding claims is characterized as reasonably possible.  The claimants' chance of
success in three of the four pending lawsuits is  also reasonably possible.  The outcome of the remaining lawsuit is
considered remote.

There are a number of outstanding CERCLA *106(a) cleanup orders where the recipients of the orders have not yet
completed the ordered response actions. Each such recipient could potentially file a claim with EPA for
reimbursements under CERCLA •106(b) of its  costs of responding to the order once it has completed the ordered
actions.

EPA is  responsible to indemnify response action contractors (CERCLA *119) for legal costs that will eventually
exceed, or have exceeded, the deductible specified in the current indemnification agreements. Such payments by the
United States would be recoverable government response  costs. EPA has only one claim, which is considered
remote.

EPA contractors have submitted response action contractor claims.  No claims were material.

All Other

There were no material litigation, asserted or unasserted claims or assessments involving all other appropriated funds
of the Agency.

Judgement Fund

In cases that are paid by the U.S. Treasury Judgement Fund, the Agency must recognize the full cost of a claim
regardless of who is actually paying the claim. Until these  claims are settled or a court judgement is assessed and the
Judgement Fund is determined to be the appropriate source for the payment, claims that are probable and estimable
must be recognized as an expense and liability of the agency. For these cases, at the time of settlement or judgement,
the liability will be reduced and an imputed  financing source recognized. See Interpretation of Federal Financial
Accounting Standards No. 2, Accounting for Treasury Judgement Fund Transactions.

As  of September 30, 2000, $5 million of Superfund related claims  and $2.9 million of All Other funds' claims were
accrued as contingent liabilities under these criteria.

In addition,  EPA is party to certain pending litigation upon which EPA believes it has a reasonable legal position.
$336.1 million of Judgement Fund claims in addition to the above accrued amounts are pending.

In the opinion of EPA's management and General Counsel, the ultimate resolution of any legal actions still pending
will not materially affect EPA's operations or financial position.
                                                       EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-43

-------
Note 19.  Grant Accrual

The EPA has revised the methodology for calculating the accrued grant expense for the fiscal year 2000 financial
statements. The methodology uses a model based upon historical grant obligations and the related payment incurred
the succeeding years. The model calculates a "what should be disbursed amount" vs. the actual disbursements made
in the year. The accrual amount is derived from the results of this model combined with an additive factor which
considers the ratio of accruals to disbursements for the last two fiscal years.  The accrual for Superfund is $43.0
million and the All Other grant accrual is $507.6 million. In the Statement of Net Cost by Goal, the grant accrual
amounts are included in "Not Assigned to Goals."

Note 20.  Environmental Cleanup Costs

EPA has four sites that require clean up stemming from its activities. Three of these sites will be paid from the
Treasury Judgement fund amounting to $32 thousand. EPA estimates that clean up on the remaining site will be
approximately $10 thousand. EPA also holds title to a site in Edison, New Jersey, which was formerly an Army
Depot.  While EPA did not cause the contamination, the Agency could potentially be liable for a portion of the
cleanup costs. However, it is expected that the Department of Defense and the General Services Administration will
bear all or most of the cost of remediation.

Accrued Cleanup Cost

EPA has fourteen sites that will require future clean up associated with permanent closure. The  estimated cost will be
approximately $15.5 million.  Since the cleanup costs associated with permanent closure are not primarily recovered
through user fees, EPA has elected to recognize  the estimated total cleanup cost as a liability upon implementation
and record changes to the estimate in subsequent years.  The FY 2000 estimate for unfunded cleanup costs  decreased
by $128 thousand from the FY 1999 estimate. There was an increase of approximately $1.3 million for funded
cleanup costs for FY 2000. EPA also could be potentially liable for cleanup  costs at a GSA-leased site; however, the
amounts are not known.  Of the $15.5 million in estimated cleanup costs, approximately $10.9 million represents the
estimated expense to close the current RTP research facility.  These costs will be incurred within the next three years.
The remaining amount represents the future decontamination and decommissioning costs of EPA's other research
facilities.

Note 21.  Superfund State Credits

Authorizing statutory language  for Superfund and related Federal regulations require States to enter into Superfund
State Contracts  (SSCs) when EPA assumes the lead for a remedial action in their State. The SSC defines the State's
role in the remedial action and obtains the State's assurance that they will share in the cost of the remedial action.
Under Superfund's authorizing statutory language, States will provide EPA with a ten percent cost share for remedial
action costs incurred at privately owned or operated sites, and at least fifty percent of all response activities  (i.e.,
removal, remedial planning, remedial action, and enforcement) at publicly operated sites. In some cases, States may
use EPA approved credits to reduce all or part of their cost share requirement that would otherwise be borne  by the
States.  Credit is limited to State site-specific expenses EPA has determined to be reasonable, documented, direct out-
of-pocket  expenditures of non-Federal funds for remedial action. Once EPA has reviewed and approved a State's
claim for credit, the State must  first apply the credit at the site where it was earned. The State may apply any
excess/remaining credit to another site when approved by EPA.  As of September 30, 2000, total remaining State
credits have been estimated at $12.6 million.

Note 22.  Superfund Preauthorized Mixed Funding Agreements

Under Superfund preauthorized mixed funding agreements, potentially responsible parties (PRPs) agree to perform
response actions at their sites with the understanding that EPA will reimburse the PRPs a certain percentage of their
total response action costs. EPA's authority to enter into mixed funding agreements is provided under Section
111 (a) (2) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980.
Under Section 122(b)(l) of CERCLA, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA)

    IV-44  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
of 1986, a PRP may assert a claim against the Superfund Trust Fund for a portion of the costs they incurred while
conducting a preauthorized response action agreed to under a mixed funding agreement. As of September 30, 2000,
EPA had 12 outstanding preauthorized mixed funding agreements with obligations totaling $40.2 million. A liability
is not recognized for these amounts until all work has been performed by the PRP and has been  approved by EPA
for payment.  Further, EPA will not disburse any funds under these agreements until the PRP's application, claim,
and claims adjustment processes have been reviewed and approved by EPA.

Note 23. Income and Expenses from other Appropria tions

The Statement of Net Cost reports program costs that include the full costs of the program outputs and consist of
the direct costs and all other costs that can be directly traced, assigned on a cause and effect basis, or reasonably
allocated to program outputs.

During Fiscal Year 2000, EPA had three appropriations which funded a variety of programmatic and non-
programmatic activities across the Agency, subject to statutory requirements. The Environmental Programs and
Management (EPM)  appropriation was created to fund personnel compensation and benefits, travel, procurement,
and contract activities. Two prior year appropriations, Program and Research Operations (PRO) and Abatement
Control and Compliance (AC&C) generated expenses. PRO funded travel, personnel compensation and benefits.
AC&C funded procurement and contract activities.

All of the expenses from EPM, PRO and AC&C were distributed among EPA's two Reporting Entities: Superfund
and All Others.  This distribution is calculated using a combination of specific identification of expenses to Reporting
Entities, and a weighted average that distributes expenses proportionately to total programmatic expenses.

As illustrated below,  this estimate does not impact the net effect of the Statement  of Net Costs.

                       Income From            Expenses From
                    Other Appropriations     Other Appropriations     Net Effect
    Superfund              $       31,270           $      (31,270)      $      0
    All Others                     (31,270)             	31,270       	0
       Total               $	0           $	0     $	0

Note 24. Custodial Non-Exchange Revenues

EPA uses the accrual basis of accounting for the collection of fines, penalties and miscellaneous receipts.
Collectibility by EPA of the fines and penalties is based on the responsible parties' willingness and ability to pay.

    Fines, Penalties and Other Misc Revenue (EPA)    $   86,590

    Accounts Receivable for Fines, Penalties and
        Other Miscellaneous  Receipts
     Accounts Receivable                               $  154,803
     Less: Allowance for Doubtful Accounts                  52,336
         Total                                        $  102.467

Note 25. Statement of Budgetary Resources

A reconciliation of budgetary resources, obligations incurred, and outlays, as presented in the  audited Statement of
Budgetary Resources, to amounts included in the Budget of the United States Government for the year ended
September 30, 2000,  is as follows:
                                                      EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-45

-------
Resources
2,151,875
(328)
2,151,547
8,932,823
(24,778)
66,618
8,974,663
Incurred
$ 1,701,337 1
(1,744)
$ 1,699,593 1
$ 7,158,665 1
(23,835)
67,907
$ 7,202,737 1
Outlays
; 1,526,587
1,000
; 1,527,587
; 6,602,265
(24,545)
57
; 6,577,777
                                                Budgetary     Obligations

    Superfund
    Statement of Budgetary Resources          f
       Adjustments to Unliquidated Obligations,
       Unfilled Customer Orders and Other
    Budget of the United States Government    f

    All Other
    Statement of Budgetary Resources          f
    Less: Funds Reported by Other Federal
           Entities
       Adjustments to Unliquidated Obligations,
       Unfilled Customer Orders and Other
    Budget of the United States Government    f

Note 26. Adjustments

For the Superfund Trust Fund this amount represents recoveries of prior year obligations of $201,660 thousand less
$2,288 thousand in canceled authority. For All Others, this amount represents recoveries of prior year obligations of
$111,767 thousand and $615 thousand of other adjustments to beginning unobligated balances, less rescinded
authority of $28,848 thousand, and $55,687 thousand in canceled authority.

Note 27. Unobligated Balances Available

The Superfund Trust Fund has an unobligated balance of $449,538 thousand in unexpired authority and $1 million in
expired authority. All Others has an unobligated balance of $1,644,998 thousand in unexpired authority and $129,160
thousand in expired authority. The unexpired authority is available to be apportioned by the Office of Management
and Budget for new obligations at the beginning of FY 2001.  Expired authority is available for upward adjustments
of obligations incurred as of the end of the fiscal year.

Note 28. Obliga ted Balance, Net - End of Period

Undelivered Orders, unpaid, at the end of the period are $2,091,767 thousand for the Superfund Trust Fund and
$8,657,913 thousand for All Others.

Note 29. Difference in Outlays Between Statement ofBudgetary Resources and SF-133

Outlays between the Statement ofBudgetary Resources  and the SF-133 differ by  $1 million for Superfund, due to an
advance that was refunded and reported on the SF-133 last year but not recorded and reported on the Statement of
Budgetary Resources until this year.

Note 30. Sta temen t of Financing

Increases in Unfunded Liabilities relate to changes in unfunded annual leave, environmental liabilities, contingent
liabilities and the Federal Employees Compensation Act (FECA) special benefit fund. For Superfund and All Others,
the changes totaled $7.0 million and $12.3 million, respectively and are reflected in Financing Sources Yet to Be
Provided.
    IV-46  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
Note 31. Beginning Unobligated Balances -All Other Statement of Budgetary Resources

All Others in the Statement of Budgetary Resource contained some previously canceled funds in the beginning
unobligated balance brought forward from FY 1999.  The amounts from canceled funds were approximately $16.2
million.  These balances have been eliminated this year in the Adjustments on the Statement of Budgetary Resources.

Note 32. Change in Accounting for Trust Funds

During FY 2000, in compliance with Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standard No. 7 (Accounting for
Revenue and Other Financing Sources), the U. S. Standard General Ledger Board issued definitive guidance for trust
fund accounting and added new Standard General Ledger accounts to further distinguish trust fund transactions from
other funds.  The EPA implemented these changes for all trust funds. These changes eliminate the use of
Unexpended Appropriations and Appropriations Used for trust funds, and indicate the inclusion of only the
Cumulative Results of Operations account in Net Position for trust funds.

The changes affect transactions in this manner: In lieu of increases to Unexpended Appropriations, amounts
appropriated or transferred to the trust funds are recorded in new accounts as Trust Fund Financing Sources-
Transfers In. Amounts transferred out no longer decrease Unexpended Appropriations, but are recorded in new
accounts as Trust Fund Financing Sources -Transfers Out. These new accounts are reported on the Statement of
Changes in Net Position as Other Financing Sources, and are closed out at year end to Cumulative Results of
Operations.  Expenditures from trust funds are still reported as expenses or purchases of capital assets and reflected
in budgetary expenditures, but are no longer reported as increases to Appropriations Used and decreases to
Unexpended Appropriations.

The cumulative effect of these changes on the accounts was to move all prior year's balances in Unexpended
Appropriations for trust funds into Cumulative Results of Operations. This cumulative effect is reported on a
separate line  on the Statement of Changes in Net Position this fiscal year. The decreases to Unexpended
Appropriations for trust funds are detailed below:

                                                           Superfund   All Other
    Hazardous Substance Superfund No-Year Trust Fund      $  2,607,783   $         0
    Superfund Annual Funds                                      49,048            0
    Leaking  Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund                       0       81,830
    Oil  Spill  Response Trust Fund                                      0        9,690
    Miscellaneous Contributed Funds Trust Fund               	0   	76

    Totals                                                   $2.656.831      $91.596

Note 33. Costs Not Assigned to Goals

On the Statement of Net Cost by Goal, $145.5 million in gross costs were not assigned to goals. This amount was
comprised of a $106.4 million increase to the year-end grant accruals, $15.2 million in unfunded expenses, $19.9
million in depreciation expenses that were not assigned, $3.0 million in bad debt expense, and $1 million in miscellaneous
expenses.

Note 34. Trans&rs-in and out, Statement of Changes in Net Position

The consolidated amounts shown as transfers-in on the Statement of Changes in Net Position are comprised of
transfers from other Federal agencies in accordance with applicable legislation.  The consolidated amounts shown as
transfers-out are nonexpenditure transfers to other Hazardous Substance Superfund allocation agency funds, such as
HHS and Labor.
                                                      EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements IV-47

-------
Note 35. Imputed Financing

In accordance with Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standard No. 5 (Liabilities of the Federal
Government), Federal agencies must recognize the portion of employees' pensions and other retirement benefits to
be paid by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) trust funds. Theses amounts are recorded as imputed costs
and imputed financing for the agency.  Each year the OPM provides federal agencies with cost factors to calculate
these imputed costs and financing that apply to the current year. These cost factors are multiplied by the current
year's salaries or number of employees, as applicable, to provide an estimate of the imputed financing that the OPM
trust funds will provide for each agency.

Note 36. Change in Accounting for Cashout Interest, Superfund

Per an agreement dated October 3,1996 between the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the EPA, the
EPA is allowed additional budget authority for interest earnings on Cashout (Special Account) collections for
Superfund.  The authority for interest earnings had previously been classified as Cashout Advances and Deferrals,
Superfund, on the Consolidating Balance Sheet and as Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections on the
Combined Statement of Budgetary Resources . In FY 2000, the beginning balance for interest earnings on Special
Accounts was reclassified from Cashout Advances and Deferrals, Superfund to Net Position on the Consolidating
Balance Sheet for Superfund. The change is consistent with guidance from OMB to treat the interest as permanently
appropriated and is consistent with definitive guidance for trust fund accounting issued by the U. S.  Standard
General Ledger Board.  This change is also in compliance with Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standard
No. 7 (Accounting for Revenue and Other Financing Sources).

For FY 2000, interest earnings that became available during the fiscal year are recorded in Trust Fund Financing
Sources - Transfers In for EPA, and are then eliminated against Treasury's Transfers-Out in the consolidation of the
Treasury and EPA funds.  The current year's earnings are included as Budget Authority on the Combined Statement
of Budgetary Resources for Superfund.

The amount available as of September 30, 2000 for Cashout Interest authority is as follows:

                                                                  Superfund
        Cashout Interest reclassified from Cashout Advances and
            Deferrals, Superfund, October 1,1999                  $    85,382
        Cashout Interest Authority Accrued FY 2000                       21,670
        Less: FY 2000 Drawdown of Authority                             (780)
        Total                                                    $   106,272
    IV-48  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
                              Environmental Protection Agency
                            Required Supplemental Information
                                   As of September 30, 2000
                                    (Dollars in Thousands)
                                           (Unaudited)
Deferred Maintenance

The EPA classifies property, plant, and equipment as follows: 1) EPA-Held Equipment, 2) Contractor-Held
Equipment, 3) Land and Buildings, and, 4) Capital Leases. The condition assessment survey method of measuring
deferred maintenance is utilized. The Agency adopts requirements or standards for acceptable operating condition in
conformance with industry practices. No deferred maintenance was reported for any of the four categories.

Intra.governmental Assets

Intragovernmental amounts represent transactions between all federal departments and agencies and are reported by
trading partner (entities  that EPA did business with during FY 2000).

EPA confirmed its investment balances with the Bureau of the Public Debt, the Department of the Treasury. In
addition, EPA sent out requests to trading partners to reconcile and confirm intragovernmental receivables and
advances. Data was  received from the Department of Defense, Department of Energy, and Tennessee Valley
Authority. (The Department of Defense includes the Navy, Army, and Air Force.) The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers was not able to give us detailed data to be able to reconcile asset balances.

    Trading                              Investments     AccountsReceivable         Other
    Partner
     Code          Agency         Superfund All Other  Superfund All Other  Superfund All Other

       04   Government Printing Office $       0$       0$       0$      43$      65$   7,409
       12   Department of Agriculture                              355       146
       13   Department of Commerce                                         48
       14   Department of Interior                              13,521
       15   Department of Justice                                   80
       17   Department of the Navy                                          248
       18   U. S. Postal Service                                                                    43
       19   Department of State                                              70
       20   Department of the Treasury   3,960,313  1,593,357                  222
       21   Department of the Army                             7,798
       31   US Nuclear Regulatory
            Commission                                                     20
       47   General Services
            Administration                                         12
       57   Department of the Air
            Force                                                          223
       58   Federal Emergency
            Management Agency                                           1,205
       61   Consumer Product Safety
            Commission                                                      8
       64   Tennessee Valley Authority                                       607


                                                    EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-49

-------
    Trading                              Investments      AccountsReceivable         Other
    Partner	
     Code           Agency         Superfund All Other  Superfund All Other  Superfund All Other
       68   EPA (between Superfund
            and All Other)                                                 4^91       6,510
       69   Department of
            Transportation                                               10 378
       75   Department of Health and
            Human Services                                                 415
       86   Department of Housing and
            Urban Development                                             943
       93   Federal Mediation and
            Conciliation Service
       96   US Army Corps of Engineer                                     1,022      15,850
       97   US Department of Defense                           10,769
       00   Unassigned                 	Q  	Q       8.136
     Total                            13.960.313 11.593.357

Intragovernmental Liabilities

EPA received a few requests for intragovernmental liabilities reconciliation from trading partners. EPA was able to
confirm balances with the National Science Foundation (49), the Office of Personnel Management (24), the
Department of the Treasury (20), and the Department of Labor (16).  However, some agencies' requests did not
have the data (such as  interagency agreement numbers) that EPA needed to do the research.

    Trading                           Accounts Payable   Accrued Liabilities     Other Liabilities
    Partner	
     Code           Agency         Superfund All Other  Superfund All Other  Superfund All Other
       03   Library of Congress         $       0$       0$      11  $181$       0$       0
       04   Government Printing Office          4         16          61        988
       11   Executive Office of the
            President                                                        40
       12   Department of Agriculture                                39        876         711      1,615
       13   Department of Commerce        1,021                  393      2,286                   152
       14   Department of Interior           901                 3,440      2,711                    36
       15   Department of Justice            617                 5,896        186         578
       16   Department of Labor            2,258                    73         24       1,355      6,064
       17   Department of the Navy                                                     355
       18   United States Postal Service                                9
       19   Department of State                                      5      1,152
       20   Department of the Treasury                              13      3,014         742      2,945
       21   Department of the Army                                            2         503
       24   Office of Personnel
            Management                                           55        488       1,865      8,162
       31   US Nuclear Regulatory
            Commission                                             19                    20
       33   Smithsonian Institution                                            33
    IV-50  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
    Trading                           Accounts Payable    Accrued Liabilities     Other Liabilities
    Partner	
     Code           Agency         Superfund All Other  Superfund All Other Superfund All Other
       47   General Services
            Administration                                       4,618     23,935
       49   National Science Foundation                             10       234
       56   Central Intelligence Agency                                         37
       57   Department of the Air
            Force                                                                    1;256
       58   Federal Emergency
            Management Agency           15,395                    6
       59   National Foundation on the
            Arts and the Humanities                                   5
       63   National Labor Relations
            Board                                                             \
       64   Tennessee Valley Authority                                1       112                   50
       68   EPA (between Superfund
            and All Others)                                       4,191                           6,510
       69   Department of
            Transportation                                       1,558       364
       72   Agency for International
            Development
       73   Small Business
            Administration                                                   34
       75   Department of Health and
            Human Services                51,841                 8,791      6,440
       80   National Aeronautics and
            Space Administration                                             231
       86   Department of Housing and
            Urban Development                                                                 2 922
       88   National Archives &
            Records Administration                                              \
       89   Department of Energy                                  490      4,032                   14
       91   Department of Education                                            3
       95   Independent Agencies                                   28        11
       96   US Army Corps of
            Engineers                      1;202       694     21,357      1,136                  314
       97   Office of the Secretary of
            Defense                          339       149
       00   Unassigned                    1.889       656


For other intragovernmental liabilities, $37,922 thousand in Debt and $102,469 thousand in Custodial Liability is
assigned to the Department of the Treasury (trading partner Code 20).
                                                    EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-51

-------
Intragovernmental Revenues and Costs

EPA's intragovernmental earned revenues are not reported by trading partners because they are below OMB's
threshold of $500 million.

                                             Superfund     All Others
    Intragovernmental Earned Revenue             ($2,249)       $63,240
    Associated Costs to generate Above Revenue
    (Budget Functional Classification 300)            (2,249)        63,240
    IV-52  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
                              Environmental Protection Agency
                            Required Supplemental Information
                    Supplemental Statement of Budgetary Resources
                                    As of September 30, 2000
                                     (Dollars in Thousands)
                                                              Unaudited
                                       Environmental                              Miscellaneous Consolidated
                                        Programs &   Science &            LUST       All          All
                                STAG   Management Technology FIFRA Trust Fund    Others      Others
Budgetary Resources:
Budget Authority
Unobligated Balances - Beginning of
  the Period
Net Transfers, Prior Year Balance
Spending Authority from Offsetting
   Collections

Adjustments

Total Budgetary Resources
 3,469,250   $  1,899,021  $ 647,500   $     0  $  70,000
                                          834,235  $ 6,920,006
1,265,880
0
13,489
52,088
219,803
0
48,345
(1,730)
159,175
0
45,490
(4,434)
11,552
0
18,593
(2,228)
3,570
0
42
1,472
14,695
(977)
185,313
(17,321)
1,674,675
(977)
311,272
27,847
; 4.800.707
2.165.439  $ 847.731  $ 27.917
75.084
1.015.945
Status of Budgetary Resources:

Obligations Incurred

Unobligated Balances - Available

Unobligated Balances-Not Available

Total Status of Budgetary Resources


Outlays:

Obligations Incurred

Less: Spending Authority from
  Offsetting Collections and
Obligated Balance, Net - Beginning
  of the Period

Less: Obligated Balance, Net - End
  of the Period

Total Outlays
3,582,074
1,218,633
0
4,800,707
3,582,074
86,462
7,570,173
7,874,156
3,191,629
$ 1,894,522
171,276
99,641
$ 2,165,439
$ 1,894,522
75,206
796,486
750,109
$ 1,865,693
$ 667,581
154,864
25,286
$ 847,731
$ 667,581
49,444
511,949
500,950
$ 629,136
$ 23,321 5
4,596
0
$ 27,917 3
$ 23,321 5
16,366
(926)
1,544
$ 4,485 3
f 70,753
4,245
86
f 75,084
f 70,753
2,108
79,306
83,976
f 63,975
$ 920,414
91,384
4,147
$ 1,015,945
$ 920,414
190,603
196,245
78,709
$ 847,347
$ 7,158,665
1,644,998
129,160
$ 8,932,823
$ 7,158,665
420,189
9,153,233
9,289,444
$ 6,602,265
                                                      EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-53

-------
                         Environmental Protection Agency
                       Required Supplemental Information
                               Working Capital Fund
                            Supplemental Balance Sheet
                              As of September 30, 2000
                               (Dollars in Thousands)
     ASSETS                                            Unaudited
        Intragovernmental:
         Fund Balance With Treasury                         $   52,509
         Accounts Receivable, Net                                28,702
         Other                                                   47
        Total Intragovernmental                                  81,258

        Inventory and Related Property, Net                             46
        General Property, Plant and Equipment, Net                   9,646
        Other                                                      1
     Total Assets                                         $   90,951
      LIABILITIES
        Intragovernmental:
         Other                                           $   47,555
        Total Intragovernmental                                  47,555

        Accounts Payable                                        2,578
        Other                                                19,034
      Total Liabilities                                          69,167
      NET POSITION
        Cumulative Results of Operations                           21,784
        Total Net Position                                       21,784
     Total Liabilities and Net Position                       $   90,951
IV-54  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
                 Environmental Protection Agency
                Required Supplemental Information
                       Working Capital Fund
                Supplemental Statement of Net Cost
               For the Year Ended September 30, 2000
                       (Dollars in Thousands)
                                                Unaudited

 COSTS:

 Intragovernmental                                 $     8,154

 With the Public                                       114,718
Total Costs                                          122,872

Less:

 Earned Revenues                                     (117,079)
 Net Cost of Operations                            $     5,793
                                    EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements IV-55

-------
                        Environmental Protection Agency
                      Required Supplemental Information
                             Working Capital Fund
              Supplemental Statement of Changes in Net  Position
                     For the Year Ended September 30, 2000
                             (Dollars in Thousands)
                                                       Unaudited
     Net Cost of Operations                                $    5,793

     Financing Sources (Other Than Exchange Revenues):

       Imputed Financing                                      5,397

       Transfers-In                                            439

       Transfers-Out                                          (439)
     Net Results of Operations                                   (396)


     Prior-Period Adjustments                                  (8,961)
     Net Change in Cumulative Results of Operations                 (9,357)


     Net Position - Beginning of the Period                        31,141
      Net Position - End of the Period                      $   21,784
IV-56  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
                    Environmental Protection Agency
                   Required Supplemental Information
                          Working Capital Fund
            Supplemental Statement of Budgetary Resources
                For the Year Ended September 30, 2000
                          (Dollars in Thousands)
Budgetary Resources                                         Unaudited
Unobligated Balances, Beginning of the Period                     $      6,941
Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections                     	136,065
Total Budgetary Resources                                     $    143,006
Status of Budgetary Resources
Obligations Incurred                                          $    121,186
Unobligated Balances Available                                       21,820
Total, Status of Budgetary Resources                             $    143,006
Outlays
Obligations Incurred                                          $    121,186
Less:   Spending Authority  from  Offsetting  Collections and
Adjustments                                                    (136,065)
   Subtotal                                                      (14,879)
Obligated Balance, Net - Beginning of the Period                         30,124
Less: Obligated Balance, Net - End of the Period                        (30,688)

Total Outlays                                              $    (15.443)
                                        EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements IV-57

-------
                          Environmental Protection Agency
                        Required Supplemental Information
                                Working Capital Fund
                        Supplemental Statement of Financing
                       For the Year Ended September 30, 2000
                                (Dollars in Thousands)
     Obligations and Nonbudgetary Resources                          Unaudited

     Obligations Incurred                                              $    121,186
     Less: Spending Authority for Offsetting Collections and Adjustments
      Earned Reimbursements
        Collected                                                       (116,923)
        Receivable from Federal Sources                                        (236)
      Change in Unfilled Orders - (Decreases)/Increases                         (18,906)
     Financing Imputed for Cost Subsidies                                       5,397
     Exchange Revenue not in the Entity's Budget                          	66
             Total Obligations as Adjusted and Nonbudgetary Resources           (9,416)

     Resources that Do Not Fund Net Cost of Operations
     Change in Amount of Goods, Services and Benefits Ordered but
      Yet Received or Provided - (Increases)/Decreases                          (2,488)
     Change in Unfilled Customers Orders, etc. - Increases/(Decreases)             18,907
     Costs Capitalized on the Balance Sheet
      General Plant, Property and Equipment                                  (9,102)
      Purchases of Inventory                                                  (93)
     Prior Period Adjustments of Capitalized Assets                               3,127
             Total Resources that Do Not Fund Net Costs of Operations      	10,351

     Components of Costs of Operations that Do Not Require
      or Generate Resources

     Depreciation and Amortization                                            4,767

             Total Costs That Do Not Require Resources                   	4,767

     Financing Sources Yet to be Provided                                 	9_1
     Net Costs of Operations                                         $      5,793
IV-58  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
                               Environmental Protection Agency
                      Required Supplemental Stewardship Information
                            For the Year Ended September 30, 2000
                                      (Dollars in Thousands)


INVESTMENT IN THE NA TION'S RESEAR CH AND DEVELOPMENT:

Public and private sector institutions have long been significant contributors to our nation's environment and human
health research agenda.  EPA's Office of Research and Development, however, is unique among scientific institutions
in this country in combining research, analysis, and the integration of scientific information across the full spectrum
of health and ecological issues and across both risk assessment and risk management. Science enables us to identify
the most important sources of risk to human health and the environment, and by so doing, informs our priority-
setting, ensures credibility for our policies, and guides our deployment of resources.  It gives us the understanding and
technologies we need to detect, abate, and avoid environmental problems. Science provides the crucial underpinning
for EPA decisions and challenges us to apply the best available science and technical analysis to our environmental
problems and to practice more integrated, more efficient, and more effective approaches to reducing environmental
risks.

Among the Agency's highest research priorities is a program to expand the understanding of near- and long-term
effects of the environment on children.  Another priority is the Particulate Matter (PA/I) research program, which
focuses on review, implementation, and eventual attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS).  For FY 2000, the full cost of the Agency's Research and Development activities totaled almost $601
million.  Below is a breakout of the expenses (dollars in thousands):

                                          FY 1998      FY1999      FY 2000
            Programmatic Expenses         507,828       543,777       541,117
            Allocated Expenses               53,322        58,728        59,523

INVESTMENT IN THE NATION'S INFRASTR UCTURE:

The Agency makes significant investments in the Nations's drinking water and clean water infrastructure.  The
investments are the result of three programs: The Construction Grant Program which is being phased out, and two
State Revolving Fund (SRF) programs.

Construction Grants Program: During the 1970s and 1980s, the Construction Grants Program was a source of
Federal funds, providing more than $60 billion of direct grants for the construction of public wastewater treatment
projects. These projects, which constituted a significant contribution to the nation's water infrastructure, included
sewage treatment plants, pumping stations, and collection and intercept sewers, rehabilitation of sewer systems, and
the control of combined sewer overflows.  The construction grants led to the improvement of water quality in
thousands of municipalities nationwide.

Congress set 1990 as the last year that funds would be appropriated for Construction Grants. Projects funded in
1990 and prior will continue until completion. Beyond 1990, EPA shifted the focus of municipal financial assistance
from grants to loans that are provided by State Revolving Funds.
State Revolving Funds: The Environmental Protection Agency provides capital, in the form of capitalization grants,
to state revolving funds which state governments use to make loans to individuals, businesses, and governmental
entities for the construction of wastewater and drinking water treatment infrastructure. When the loans are repaid to
the state revolving fund, the collections are used to finance new loans for new construction projects. The capital is
reused by the states and is not returned to the Federal Government.
                                                      EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-59

-------
The Agency is also appropriated funds to finance the construction of infrastructure outside the Revolving Funds.
These are reported below as Other Infrastructure Grants.

The Agency's expenses related to investments in the Nation's Water Infrastructure are outlined below (dollars in
thousands):

                                           FY1998  FY 1999    FY 2000
             Construction Grants             444,817   414,528      55,766
             Clean Water SRF               1,109,017   925,744   1,564,894
             Safe Drinking Water SRF          94,936   387,429     588,116
             Other Infrastructure Grants      138,363   245,606     212,124
             Allocated Expenses              187,649   213,117     266,299

STEWARDSHIP LAND

The Agency acquires title to certain land and land rights under the authorities provided in Section 104 (J) CERCLA
related to remedial clean-up  sites.  The land rights are in the form of easements to allow access to clean-up sites or to
restrict usage  of remediated  sites.  In some instances, the Agency takes title to the land during remediation and returns
it to private ownership upon the completion of clean-up.

As of September 30, 2000, the Agency possesses the following land and land rights:

           Superfund Sites with Easements
           Beginning Balance                      24
           Additions                                1
           Withdrawals                       	0
           Ending Balance                        25

           Superfund Sites with Land acquired
           Beginning Balance                      20
           Additions                                3
           Withdrawals                       	0
           Ending Balance                        23

HUMAN CAPITAL

Agencies are required to  report expenses incurred to train the public with the intent of increasing or maintaining the
nation's economic productive capacity.  Training, public awareness, and research fellowships are  components of many
of the Agency's programs, and are effective in achieving the Agency's mission of protecting public health and the
environment, but the focus is on enhancing the nation's environmental, not economic, capacity.


The Agency's expenses related to investments in the Human Capital are outlined below (dollars in thousands):

                                               FY1998  FY 1999    FY 2000
             Training and Awareness Grants       39,131    46,630      49,265
             Fellowships                         11,084    10,239       9,570
             Allocated Expenses                    5,273     6,142       6,472
    IV-60  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements IV-61

-------
         The Agency's FY 2000 Annual Report includes a
         summary of the Office of Inspector General
         Audit Report on EPA's Fiscal 2000 Financial
         Statements (2001-1-00107).  For a complete copy
         of the report, please contact:

         U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
         Office of Inspector General
         Financial Audit Division (2422)
         1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
         Washington, DC 20460

         Telephone: 202-260-1397
         Facimile:  202-260-1398

         Electronic version of complete audit report
         available at: http://www.epa.gov/oigearth
                        Audit Report 2001-1-00107

IV-62  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements

-------
                 Inspector General's Report on  EPA's
                     Fiscal 2000  Financial  Statements
The Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

We have audited the consolidating balance sheet of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and its
subsidiary funds, the Superfund Trust Fund (Superfund) and All Other Appropriated Funds (All Other)
as of September 30, 2000, and the related consolidating statements of net cost and changes in net
position, consolidated statement of net cost by goal, combined statement of budgetary resources,
combined  statement of financing, and consolidated statement of custodial activity for the year then
ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of EPA's management.  Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on these financial statements based upon our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards; the standards
applicable to financial statements contained in Government  Auditing Standards, issued by the
Comptroller General of the United States; and Office of Management and Budget Bulletin 01-02, Audit
Requirements for Federal Financial Statements.  These standards require that we plan and perform the
audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free  of material
misstatements. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used
and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

The financial statements include expense of grantees, contractors and other Federal  agencies.  Our audit
work pertaining to these expenses included testing only within EPA.  Audits of grants, contracts and
interagency agreements performed at a later date may disclose questioned costs of an undeterminable
amount at  this time.  In addition, the United States Treasury collects and accounts for excise taxes that
are deposited into the Superfund and Leaking Underground  Storage Tank Trust Funds.1 The United
States Treasury is also responsible for investing amounts not needed for current disbursements and
transferring funds to EPA as authorized in legislation. Since the United States Treasury, and not EPA, is
responsible for these activities, our audit work did not cover these activities.

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) is not independent with respect to amounts pertaining to its
operations that are presented in the financial statements.  The amounts included for the OIG are not
material to EPA's financial statements. The OIG is organizationally independent with respect to all
other assets of the Agency's activities.

In our opinion, the consolidating financial statements present fairly the consolidated and individual
assets, liabilities, net position, net cost, net  cost by goal, changes in net position, budgetary resources,
reconciliation of net cost to budgetary obligations, and custodial activity of the U.S. Environmental
   l The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund is included in the All Other Appropriated Funds column of
   the financial statements.

                                   Audit Report 2001-1-00107

                                                EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-63

-------
Protection Agency and its subsidiary funds, the Superfund Trust Fund and All Other Appropriated
Funds, as of and for the year ended September 30, 2000, in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles.

Review of EPA's Required Supplemental Stewardship Information, Required
       Supplemental Information, and Management Discussion and Analysis

We inquired of EPA's management as to their methods of preparing its RSSI, Required Supplemental
Information, and Management Discussion and Analysis, and reviewed this information for consistency
with the financial statements. However, our audit was not designed to express an opinion, and
accordingly, we do not express an opinion.

We did not identify any material inconsistencies between the information presented in EPA's financial
statements and the information presented in EPA's RSSI, Required Supplemental Information, and
Management Discussion and Analysis. The January 7, 2000, technical amendments to OMB Bulletin
No. 97-01, Form and Content of Agency Financial Statements, require agencies to report, as Required
Supplemental Information, their intra-governmental assets and liabilities by federal trading partner. We
did find that, through no fault of EPA, other Federal agencies were unable to reconcile EPA's reported
transactions with their records. Attachment 2 of the OIG's complete audit report on EPA's FY 2000
financial statements provides additional details on this issue.

Evaluation of Internal Controls

As defined by OMB, internal control, as it relates to the financial statements, is a process, effected by the
Agency's management and other personnel, designed to provide reasonable assurance that the following
objectives are met:

       Reliability of financial reporting - Transactions are properly recorded, processed, and
       summarized to permit the timely and reliable preparation of the financial statements and RSSI in
       accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; and assets are safeguarded against loss
       from unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition.

       Reliability of performance reporting - Transactions and other data that  support reported
       performance measures are properly recorded, processed, and summarized to permit the
       preparation of performance information in accordance with criteria stated by management.

       Compliance with applicable laws and regulations - Transactions are executed in accordance
       with laws governing the use of budget authority and other laws and regulations that could have a
       direct and material effect on the financial statements or RSSI; and any other laws, regulations,
       and government-wide policies identified by OMB.

In planning and performing our audit, we considered EPA's internal controls over financial reporting by
obtaining an understanding of the Agency's internal controls, determined whether internal controls had
been placed in operation, assessed control risk, and performed tests of controls in order to determine our
auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing  our opinion on the financial statements. We limited


                                   Audit Report 2001-1-00107

    IV-64  EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements

-------
our internal control testing to those controls necessary to achieve the objectives described in OMB
Bulletin No. 01-02, Audit Requirements for Federal Financial Statements, as supplemented by an OMB
memorandum dated January 4, 2001, Revised Implementation Guidance for the Federal Financial
Management Improvement Act. We did not test all internal controls relevant to operating objectives as
broadly defined by the Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act of 1982, such as those controls relevant
to ensuring efficient operations.  The objective of our audit was not to provide assurance on internal
controls, and accordingly, we do not express an opinion on internal controls.

Our consideration of the internal controls over financial reporting would not necessarily disclose all
matters in the internal control over financial reporting that might be reportable conditions.  Under
standards issued by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, reportable conditions are
matters coming to our attention relating to  significant deficiencies in the design or operation of the
internal control that, in our judgment, could adversely affect the Agency's ability to record, process,
summarize, and report financial data consistent with the assertions by management in the financial
statements. Material weaknesses are reportable conditions in which the design or operation of one or
more of the internal control components does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that
misstatements in amounts that would be material  in relation to the financial statements being audited
may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing
their assigned functions. Because of inherent limitations in internal controls, misstatements, losses, or
noncompliance may nevertheless occur and not be detected. However, we noted certain matters
discussed below involving the internal control and its operation that we consider to be reportable
conditions. However, none of the reportable conditions is believed to be a material weakness.

In addition, we considered EPA's internal control over the RSSI by obtaining an understanding of the
Agency's internal controls, determined whether these internal controls had been placed in operation,
assessed control risk, and performed tests of controls as required by OMB Bulletin No. 01-02. Our
procedures were not designed to provide assurance on these internal controls, and accordingly, we do not
express an opinion on such controls.

Finally, with respect to internal control related to  performance measures presented in EPA 's Fiscal Year
2000 Annual Report, Section 1, Overview and Analysis (which  addresses requirements for a
Management's Discussion and Analysis), we obtained an understanding of the design of significant
internal controls relating to the existence and completeness assertions, as required by OMB Bulletin No.
01-02. Our procedures were not designed to provide assurance  on internal control over reported
performance  measures, and accordingly, we do not express an opinion on such controls.

Reportable Conditions

Reportable conditions are internal control weakness matters coming to the auditor's attention that, in the
auditor's judgment, should be communicated because they represent significant deficiencies in the design
or operation of internal control that could adversely affect the organization's ability to meet the OMB
objectives for financial reporting discussed above.

In evaluating the Agency's internal control structure, we identified seven reportable conditions in the
following areas:
                                     Audit Report 2001-1-00107

                                                 EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-65

-------
Process for Preparing Financial Statements

The Agency significantly improved the preparation process for its fiscal 2000 financial statements
compared to prior year submissions.  However, the financial statement preparation process did not
provide the needed result, an unqualified audit opinion, without difficulty.  Problems were encountered
by the Agency in fairly presenting grant accrual amounts.  Additionally, some other material items were
identified by auditors and then jointly resolved so they would not affect the audit opinion.

Accounting for Capitalized Property

For a number of years, we have reported that EPA needs to make improvements in its accounting for
property. During fiscal 2000, although the Agency continued to take action to correct weaknesses in this
area, we determined that the Agency needs to continue its efforts to improve its accounting for property.
Specifically, we found that:

              property was not timely or accurately entered in the Fixed Assets Subsystem (FAS);2
       •       there were weaknesses in the Agency's process for reconciling property information in
              the Integrated Financial Management System (IFMS) with that in FAS;
       •       financial statement balances for contractor-held property were incorrect;
              contractor-held property transferred was misclassified; and
       •       real property values were not accurately recorded.

EPA's Process for Reviewing Unliquidated Obligations

EPA did not timely identify and deobligate inactive unliquidated obligations during its  annual review.
As a result of weaknesses in the review process, the Agency had to perform an additional "special
review" to obtain a more accurate accounting of its unliquidated obligations.  This special review
identified $26.5 million of open unliquidated obligations that should have been deobligated by
September 30, 2000.

EPA's Interagency Agreement Invoice Approval Process

Some EPA project officers did not fulfill oversight duties related to reviewing and approving
Interagency Agreement (IAG) invoices. We noted deficiencies in this area in prior reports, and we
continue to find instances where project offices at EPA's Headquarters and Cincinnati Financial
Management Center (CFMC) did not timely approve IAG invoices because they did not receive the
supporting cost information from  other Federal agencies to substantiate invoice amounts. Additionally,
CFMC continued to use the "first-in first-out" accounting basis (charging the first line of accounting) to
allocate costs charged on lAGs with multiple goals/subobjectives, which provides limited assurance that
costs were charged to the appropriate goals/subobjectives.
           In late fiscal 1997, the Agency implemented FAS, the Agency's property accountability system, which is
   integrated with IFMS, the Agency's accounting system.

                                    Audit Report 2001-1-00107

   IV-66   EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements

-------
Documentation and Approval of Journal Vouchers

Journal and standard vouchers prepared by the Financial Reports and Analysis Branch, OCFO, were not
always properly documented and approved. While most of the entries appear to be correct, we are
concerned about the vulnerability associated with executing transactions without proper supervisory
review and approval.

Timely Repayment of Asbestos Loan Debt to Treasury

The Las Vegas Financial Management Center (LVFMC) has not made timely repayments of the
Agency's asbestos loan debt to the Department of Treasury.  EPA collects payments from loan recipient
schools each year but has not made regular repayments to Treasury. The balance, approximately $6.8
million, represents repayments of principal EPA has collected since fiscal 1997 but has yet to repay, less
the amounts paid to Treasury for annual interest.

Automated Application Processing Controls

We continue to be unable to assess the adequacy of the automated internal control structure as it relates
to automated input, processing, and output controls for IFMS. IFMS applications have a direct and
material impact on the Agency's financial statements. Therefore, an assessment of each application's
automated input, processing, and output controls, as well as compensating manual controls, is necessary
to determine the reliance we can place on the financial statements.

Attachment 1 of the OIG's complete audit report of EPA's FY 2000 financial statements describes each
of the above reportable conditions in more detail and provides our recommendations and Agency
comments on actions that should be taken to correct these conditions.  We will also be reporting other
less significant matters involving the internal control structure and its operation in a separate
management letter.

Comparison of ERA'S FMFIA Report with Our Evaluation of Internal Controls

OMB Bulletin No. 01-02, Audit Requirements for Federal Financial Statements, requires us to compare
material weaknesses disclosed during the audit with those material weaknesses reported in the Agency's
Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA or Integrity Act) report that relate to the financial
statements and identify material weaknesses disclosed by audit that were not reported  in the Agency's
FMFIA report.  This year, for the first time, EPA will report on Integrity Act decisions in EPA's Fiscal
Year 2000 Annual Report. For a discussion on Agency reported Integrity Act material weaknesses and
corrective action strategy, please refer to EPA's Fiscal Year 2000 Annual Report, Section III, FY 2000
Management Accomplishments and Challenges.

For reporting under FMFIA, material weaknesses are defined differently than they are defined for
financial statement audit purposes. OMB Circular A-123, Management Accountability and Control,
defines a material weakness as a deficiency that the Agency head determines to be significant enough to
be reported outside the Agency.
                                   Audit Report 2001-1-00107

                                               EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-67

-------
For financial statement audit purposes, OMB defines material weaknesses in internal control as
reportable conditions in which the design or operation of the internal control does not reduce to a
relatively low level the risk that errors, fraud, or noncompliance in amounts that would be material in
relation to the financial statements or RSSI being audited,  or material to a performance measure or
aggregation of related performance measures, may occur and not be detected within a timely period by
employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. Our audit did not disclose any
material weakness that was not reported by the Agency as  part of the Integrity Act process.

As a part of the fiscal 2000 Integrity Act process, the Agency reported the following material weaknesses
that relate to the Agency's financial statements:

       Information System Security - The Office of Environmental Information (OEI) recognizes that
       past improvements to its information security program  have not resulted in a complete,
       comprehensive information security program. Therefore, this office is expanding its existing
       material and Agency weaknesses, Information Systems Security Plans and Cyber Security, to
       address all security-related deficiencies. Corrective actions are expected to be completed in
       fiscal 2002.

       Construction Grants Close Out - In 1992, EPA designated this area as an Agency weakness,
       and in 1996 reclassified it as a material weakness due to a concern that lack of Agency-wide
       attention might result in the loss of resources to properly complete the program. Corrective
       actions are expected to be completed in fiscal 2002.

Tests of Compliance with Laws and Regulations

EPA management is responsible for complying with laws and regulations applicable to the Agency. As
part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the Agency's financial statements are free of
material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws and
regulations, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of
financial statement amounts, and certain other laws and regulations specified in OMB Bulletin No. 01-
02, Audit Requirements for Federal Financial Statements, as supplemented by an OMB Memorandum
dated January 4, 2001, Revised Implementation Guidance for the Federal Financial Management
Improvement Act. The OMB guidance requires that we evaluate compliance with Federal financial
management system requirements, including the requirements  referred to in the  FFMIA of 1996. We
limited our tests of compliance to these provisions and did not test compliance with all laws and
regulations applicable to EPA.

Providing an opinion on compliance with certain provisions of laws and regulations was not an objective
of our audit and, accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.  There are a number of ongoing
investigations involving EPA's grantees and contractors that could reveal violations of laws and
regulations, but a determination about these cases has not been made.

None of the noncompliances discussed below would result in material misstatements to the audited
financial statements.
                                   Audit Report 2001-1-00107

   IV-68   EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements

-------
Federal Financial Management Improvement Act Noncompliance

Under FFMIA, we are required to report whether the Agency's financial management systems
substantially comply with the Federal financial management systems requirements, applicable Federal
accounting standards, and the United States Government Standard General Ledger at the transaction
level. OMB Bulletin No. 01-02, as supplemented by an OMB memorandum dated January 4, 2001,
Revised Implementation Guidance for the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act,
substantially changed the guidance for determining whether or not an Agency substantially complied
with the Federal financial management systems requirements, applicable Federal accounting standards,
and the United States Government Standard General Ledger at the transaction level. The document is
intended to focus Agency and auditor activities on the essential requirements of FFMIA. The document
lists the specific requirements of FFMIA, as well as factors to consider in reviewing systems and for
determining  substantial compliance with FFMIA. It also provides guidance to Agency heads for
developing corrective action plans to bring an Agency into compliance with FFMIA.  To meet the
FFMIA requirement, we performed tests of compliance with FFMIA section 803(a) requirements and
used the OMB guidance, revised on January 4, 2001, for determining substantial  noncompliance with
FFMIA.

The results of our tests disclosed one instance where the Agency's financial management systems did not
substantially comply with the applicable Federal accounting standard. We identified a substantial
noncompliance with the SFFAS No. 4 accounting standard for managerial cost accounting. Attachment
2 of the OIG's complete audit report on EPA's FY 2000 financial statements provides a full description
of this issue.

In addition to the above instance of substantial noncompliance, we identified two other noncompliances
related to reconciliation of intra-governmental transactions and financial system security. However,
these noncompliances do not meet the definition of a substantial noncompliance as described in OMB
guidance.

Attachment 2 of the OIG's complete audit report on EPA's FY 2000 financial statements provides
additional details and provides our recommendations and Agency comments on actions that should be
taken on these matters.

Appropriation Law Noncompliance

Disbursements for Multiple Appropriation Grants. EPA is not complying with appropriation law
when making disbursements for grants funded with more than one appropriation. Disbursements for
these grants are made using the oldest available funding (appropriation) first which may or may not be
the  appropriation that benefitted from the work performed.  Thus, EPA is not complying with Title 31
U.S.C. 1301  which requires EPA to match disbursements to the benefitting appropriation.  A January 13,
2000, Office of General Counsel decision concluded that making disbursements for multiple
appropriation grants using the oldest available funding first violates Title 31 U.S.C. 1301 and is an
inappropriate method of charging, except in limited situations. This issue was first reported in our fiscal
1994 audit. Attachment 3 of the OIG's complete audit report on EPA's FY 2000 financial statements
provides a description of the Agency's corrective action plans and milestones.
                                   Audit Report 2001-1-00107

                                               EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-69

-------
Prior Audit Coverage

During previous financial or financial-related audits, weaknesses that impacted our audit objectives were
reported in the following areas:

             The Agency's process for preparing financial statements, including the Statements of
             Budgetary Resources, Financing, and Net Cost.
       •      Complying with FFMIA requirements.
       •      Reviewing unliquidated obligations.
             Reporting intra-governmental assets and liabilities by Federal trading partner.
       •      Accounting for the cost to achieve goals and complying with SFFAS No. 4,
             Managerial Cost Accounting Concepts and Standards for the Federal Government.
       •      Accounting for and managing Superfund accounts receivable.
             Accounting for and controlling property.
       •      Recording accrued liabilities for grants.
             Approving payments for lAGs.
             Documenting EPA s IFMS.
             Complying with Federal  financial management system  security requirements.
       •      Accounting for payments for grants funded from multiple appropriations.
             Identifying and allocating indirect costs.
       •      Reviewing Agency user fees.
             Allocating costs to the Superfund Trust Fund.

Attachment 3, Status of Prior Audit Report Recommendations, of the OIG's complete audit report on
EPA's FY 2000 financial statements summarizes the current status of  corrective actions taken on prior
audit report recommendations in each of these areas.

The Chief Financial Officer, as the Agency's Audit Follow-up Official, oversees EPA's follow-up on
audit findings and recommendations, including resolution and implementation of corrective actions. For
these prior audits, final action occurs when the Agency completes implementation of the corrective
actions to remedy weaknesses identified in the audit.

We acknowledge that many actions and initiatives have been taken to  resolve prior financial statement
audit issues. We also recognize that the issues we have reported are complex, and require extensive,
long-term corrective actions and coordination by the Chief Financial Officer with various Assistant
Administrators, Regional Administrators, and Office Directors before  they can be completely resolved.
A number of issues have been unresolved for a number of years.

In response to our inquiries on actions taken by the OCFO to resolve long outstanding audit
recommendations, a representative informed us of a number of efforts that were conducted in fiscal
2000. The OCFO continued efforts to stress the importance of timely  and effective audit management
practices.  The OIG and OCFO held a joint meeting with the Audit Follow-up Coordinators to: (1)
reinforce their roles and responsibilities, (2) review expectations for audit follow-up, as laid out in EPA
Order 2750, Audit Management Process, and (3) reemphasize the importance to Audit Follow-up
Coordinators in keeping their managers and the OIG informed of progress.


                                    Audit Report 2001-1-00107

   IV-70   EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements

-------
The OIG will continue to work with the OCFO in helping to resolve all audit issues resulting from our
financial statement audits.

Agency Comments and  OIG Evaluation

In a memorandum dated February 15, 2001, the Acting Comptroller responded to our draft report.  The
OCFO generally concurred with our recommendations and has completed or planned a number of
corrective actions to implement most or our recommendations.  However, the OCFO disagreed with our
classifying the process for preparing financial statements as a reportable condition. The OCFO believed
that the specific examples depicted are few in number and, in some cases, reflect differences of
professional judgement on presentation rather than errors and did not believe the occurrences were
serious enough to warrant a reportable condition on the preparation process. Also, the OCFO disagreed
with our conclusion that the Agency is in substantial noncompliance with the requirements of SFFAS
No. 4, Managerial Cost Accounting Concepts and Standards for the Federal Government. The OCFO
believes that the Agency is in substantial compliance with the managerial cost accounting standard and
therefore did not agree with our recommendations for corrective action and did not believe that a
remediation plan under FFMIA would be required.

The OIG has not changed the classification of the process for preparing financial statements as a
reportable condition or our conclusion on reporting a substantial noncompliance with the managerial
cost accounting standard.

The preparation process for financial statements, while substantially improved from prior years, still is
far from routine. Problems identified by our audit included several issues that would have resulted in a
qualified audit opinion. We continue to report this matter as a reportable condition because the process
should be routine,  and should result in draft financial statements without material errors. To a lesser
degree than in prior years, auditors are being used as a quality control mechanism.  Accordingly, we
believe the preparation process warrants reporting as a reportable condition.

Relative to Agency comments on managerial cost accounting, the Agency did not produce or utilize cost
per output during fiscal 2000 as required by SFFAS No. 4. Without an indirect cost policy that provides
for full cost of outputs, the Agency cannot satisfy the accounting standard. The goal, objective, and
stated purposes  of SFFAS No. 4 were not being met.

The rationale for our conclusions and a summary of the Agency comments is included in the appropriate
sections of this report and the Agency's complete response is included as Appendix II of the OIG's
complete audit report on EPA's FY 2000 financial statements.
                                   Audit Report 2001-1-00107

                                                EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements  IV-71

-------
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the management of EPA, OMB, and
Congress, and it is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Edward Gekosky
Divisional Inspector General
Financial Audit Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
February 26, 2001
                                    Audit Report 2001-1-00107

   IV-72   EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements

-------
For more information on EPA's FY 2000
Financial Statements, contact:

Financial Management Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Ariel Rios Building
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. (2733R)
Washington, DC 20460
                    EPA's FY 2000 Annual Financial Statements IV-73

-------
            FY2000
ANNUAL REPORT
       APPENDIX
            APPENDIX A
   EPA ORGANIZATION CHART

            APPENDIX B
        LIST OF ACRONYMS

-------
                   U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Environmental
Appeals Board
Office of Regional
Operations
Office of
Children's Health
Protection
Office of
Executive
Support
Office of the
Executive
Secretariat
Office of
Administrative
Law Judges
Office of
Cooperative
Environmental
Management
Office of Civil
Rights
Office of Small and
Disadvantaged
Business
Utilization
Science Advisory
Board Staff Office
                                           Administrator
                                        Deputy Administrator
 Assistant Administrator
 for Administration and
 Resource Management
Assistant Administrator
  for Air and Radiation
    Office of General
       Counsel
  Office of Inspector
       General
 Assistant Administrator
for Prevention, Pesticides,
  and Toxic Substances
Assistant Administrator
  for Research and
     Development
       Region I
      Boston, MA
      Region II
    New York, NY
       Region V
      Chicago, IL
      Region VI
      Dallas, TX
                               Region IX
                           San Francisco, CA
                                                                                Associate Administrator for
                                                                                   Congressional and
                                                                                Intergovernmental Relations
                                                                                Associate Administrator for
                                                                              Communications, Education, and
                                                                                     Media Relations
                                                                                Associate Administrator for
                                                                                  Policy, Economics, and
                                                                                       Innovation
Assistant Administrator
 for Enforcement and
 Compliance Assurance
   Office of the Chief
    Financial Officer
Assistant Administrator
   for International
      Activities
      Assistant
  Administrator for
    Environmental
     Information
Assistant Administrator
  for Solid Waste and
 Emergency Response
Assistant Administrator
      for Water
      Region III
   Philadelphia, PA
      Region IV
     Atlanta, GA
     Region VII
   Kansas City, KS
     Region VIM
     Denver, CO
                                        Region X
                                       Seattle, WA
                                                                                              Appendix A

-------
                               LIST OF ACRONYMNS

AFS           Air Facility Sources System
AIRNOW      Computer model displays smog levels
AIRS          Aerometric Information Retrieval System
APG          Annual Performance Goal
APR           Annual Performance Report
AQCD         Air Quality Criteria Document
ARP           Acid Rain Program
ATS           Allowance Tracking System
AQCD         Air Quality Criteria Document
AQS           Air Quality Subsystem
ASDWA        Association of State Drinking Water Administrators
ASTM         American Society for Testing and Materials

B&F           Buildings and Facilities
BACT         Best Available Control Technology
BECC         Border Environment Cooperative Commission
BMS           Brownfields Management System
BOSC         Board of Scientific Counselors
BTU           British Thermal  Unit
CAA           Clean Air Act
CAAA         Clean Air Act Amendments
CAFO         Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations
CARAT        Committee to Advise on Reassessments and Transition
CAS           Centers for Applied Science
CASAC        Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee
CASTNet      Clean Air Status Trends Network
CCR           Consumer Confidence Report
CEC           Commission for Environmental Cooperation
CEIS           Center for Environmental Information and Statistics
GEMS         Continuous Emission Monitoring System
CERCLA      Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
CEQ           Council on Environmental Quality
CFC           Chlorofluorocarbon
CMAQ        Community Multi-scale Air Quality model
CMC           Center for Marine Conservation
CO            Carbon Monoxide
CO2           Carbon Dioxide
CPM           Core Performance Measure
CRtK          Chemical Right-to-Know
CSI            Common Sense Initiative
CSO           Combined Sewer Overflows
CSRS           Civil Service Retirement System
CTAG         Certification and Training Assessment Group
CWA           Clean Water Act
CWAP         Clean Water Action Plan
CWSRF        Clean Water State Revolving Fund

DDT           Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
DFE           Design for the Environment Program
                                                                                    Appendix B

-------
DHHS         Department of Health and Human Services
DOE          Department of Energy
DPD          Disinfection By-Products
DWSRF        Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund

E.O.           Executive Order
EGOS         Environmental Council of the States
EDC          Endocrine-Disrupting Chemical
EDSC         Environmental Data Standards Council
EEOC         Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
EIA           Energy Information Agency
EIMS          Environmental Information Management System
EMAP         Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
EMPACT      Environmental Monitoring for Public Access and Community Tracking
EOSTAC      Endocrine Disrupter Screening and Testing Advisory Committee
EPA           Environmental Protection Agency
EPCRA        Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
EPM          Environmental Programs and Management
ERD          External Review Draft
ESP           Environmental Stewardship Strategies
ETV          Environmental Technology Verification

FAS           Fixed Assets Subsystem
FDA          Food and Drug Administration
FECA         Federal Employees Compensation Act
FERS          Federal Employees Retirement System
FTE           Full Time Equivalents
FIFRA         Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
FPMN         Fine Particle Monitoring Network
FMFIA        Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act
FQPA         Food Quality Protection Act
FREDS        Findings  and Regional Elements Data System
FRS           Facility Registry Systems
FTE           Full Time Equivalents
FY            Fiscal Year

GAO          General Accounting Office
GAP          General Assistance Program
GCRP         Global Change Research Program
GCVTC        Grand  Canyon Visibility Transport Commission
GIS           Geographic Information System
GPRA         Government Performance and Results Act
GSA          General Services Administration
GWR          Ground Water Rule

HCFC         Hydrochlorofluorocarbons
HEPA         High Efficiency Particulate Air
HPV          High Production Volume
HTPS          High-Throughput Prescreening
HUD          Department of Housing and Urban Development
 EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
1-3             Information Integration Initiative
IAG           Inter-Agency Agreement
ICIS           Integrated Compliance Information System
IDEA          Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis
IECP          Integrated Error Correction Process
IGCE          Independent Government Cost Estimates
IMPROVE     Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments
IRIS           Integrated Risk Information System
IRM           Information Resources Management
ISEC          Integrated Science for Ecosystem Challenges
IT             Information Technology
IWI           Index of Watershed Indicators

Labs21         Laboratories for the 21st Century
LaMP          Lakewide Management Plan
LTESWTR     Long-Term Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
LUST          Leaking Underground Storage Tank

MACT         Maximum Achievable Control Technology
MAIA          Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment
MIMS          Multimedia Integrated Modeling System
MMTCE       Metric Tons of Carbon Equivalent
MOBILE      Mobile Source Emissions Factor Model
MOR          Management Oversight Review
MPG          Miles Per Gallon
MSW          Municipal Solid Waste
MTBE         Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether
MYP          Multiyear Plan

NAAQS        National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAC          National Advisory Committee
NADP         National Atmospheric Reposition Program
NAIN          National Antimicrobial Information Network
NAFTA        North American Free Trade Agreement
NARAP        North American Regional Action Plan
NAS           National Academy of Science
NAVITEA     Northern Arizona University Institute for Tribal Environmental Professionals
NEJAC        National Environmental Justice Advisory Group
NEP           National Estuary Program
NEPA          National Environmental Policy Act
NEPPS        National Environmental Performance Partnership System
NETI          National Enforcement Training Institute
NHANES      National Health and Nutrition Evaluation Survey
NO2           Nitrogen Dioxide
NOA          New Obligational Authority
NOAA         National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NOx           Nitrogen Oxide
NPDES        National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPL           National Priorities List
NPRD         National Pesticide Residue Database
NPS           Nonpoint Source
                                                                                      Appendix B

-------
NRDC         Natural Resources Defense Council
NSATA        National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment
NTI           National Toxics Inventory
OCFO
ODS
OECD
OKI
OIG
OMB
OP
OPA
OPPIN
OSHA
OSTP
OTCB/METP

P2
PAH
PBB
Pb
PBT
PCB
PCS
PE
PERS
PM
PMN
PNGV
POP
PPA
PPGs
PRC
PRO
PRP

QA/QC
QIC

RACs
RAP
RCRA
RCRAInfo
RED
REI
ReVA
RFC
RFP
RGI
RMF
Ozone
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Ozone-Depleting Substance
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
Office of Environmental Information
Office of the Inspector General
Office of Management and Budget
Organophosphate
Oil Pollution Act
Office of Pesticide Program Information Network
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Office of Science and Technology Policy
Ozone Transport Commission's NOx Budget/Multistate Emissions Trading Program

Pollution Prevention
Polycylic Aeromatic Hydrocarbon
Poly-Brominated Biphenols
Lead
Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxic
Polychlorinated Biphenyl
Permit Compliance System
Program Element
Performance and Environmental  Results System
Particulate Matter
Pre-Manufacture Notice
Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles
Persistent Organic Pollutant
Performance Partnership Agreement
Program Performance Grants
Program Results Code
Program and Research Operations
Potentially Responsible Party

Quality Action/Quality Control
Quality and Information Council

Response Action Contracts
Remedial Action Plan
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System
Reregistration Eligibility Decision
Reinventing Environmental Information
Regional Vulnerability Assessment
Reformulated Gasoline
Request for Proposal
Regional Geographic Initiative
Re-registration Maintenance Fees
 EPA's FY 2000 Annual Report

-------
RMP
RP
RPO
RTP

S&T
SAB
SAMI
SAP
SARA
SCAP
SDWA
SDWIS
SEP
SES
SFIP
SIP
SITE
SLAM
S02
SPCC
SRI
SSCs
STAG
STAR
Risk Management Plan
Responsible Parties
Regional Planning Organization
Research Triangle Park

Science and Technology
Science Advisory Board
Southern Appalachian Mountains Initiative
Scientific Advisory Panel
Superfund Amendments and Re authorization Act of 1986
Superfund Consolidated Accomplishments Plan
Safe Drinking Water Act
Safe Drinking Water Information System
Supplemental Environmental Project
Senior Executive Service
Sector Facility Indexing Project
State Implementation Plan
Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation
State and Local Air Monitoring Station
Sulfur Dioxide
Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures
Superfund Redevelopment Initiative
Superfund State Contracts
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Science to Achieve Results
TAMSC        Tribal Air Monitoring Support Center
TEA           Tribal Environmental Agreement
TEA-21        Transportation Equality Act for the 21st Century
TIS            Tolerance Index System
TMDL         Total Maximum Daily Load
TRAC         Tolerance Reassessment Advisory Committee
TRI            Toxics Release Inventory
TRI-ME       Toxics Release Inventory Made Easy
TRIS           Toxic Release Inventory System
TSCA         Toxic Substances Control Act

USDA         U.S. Department of Agriculture
USGCRP       U.S. Global Change Research Program
UST           Underground Storage Tank
UV            Ultraviolet
VMT
voc

WCF
WQS
WRAP

XL
Vehicle Miles Traveled
Volatile Organic Compound

Working Capital Fund
Water Quality Standards
Western Regional Air Partnership

eXcellence and Leadership
                                                                                     Appendix B

-------
                    PUBLIC ACCESS TO EPA'S PROGRAMS;
                       LOCAL, STATE AND TRIBAL NEWS;
                    AND ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
   The public is invited to access http://www.epa.gov to obtain the latest environmental news, browse
EPA topics, discover what is happening in your community, obtain information on interest groups, research
laws and regulations, search specific program areas, learn how to get information, or access EPA's historical
database.
In The News

Browse EPA Topics



Your Community

Audience Groups


Laws & Regulations


Programs
Headlines, Emerging Issues, Local Stories, Consumer News, Public Participation

Air, Cleanup, Compliance & Enforcement, Economics, Ecosystems, Emergencies,
Environmental Management, Human Health, Industry, Pesticides, Pollutants/Toxics,
Pollution Prevention, Research, Treatment & Control, Wastes, Water

Envirofacts, EnviroMapper, Surf Your Watershed, Community Highlights
Kids, Students, Teachers, Concerned Citizens, Industry, Small Businesses, State, Local,
Tribal, Researchers

Major Environmental Laws, Current Legislation in Congress, U.S. Code, Regulations
& Proposed Rules, Code of Federal Regulations

Reinvention Activities, Industry Partnerships, Offices, Regions, Research, Geographic
Focus, State, Local, Tribal, General Interest
Information Sources   Libraries, Hotlines, Clearinghouses, Dockets, Publications, Newsletters, Information
                    Request
About EPA
People Locator, Postal Addresses, History, Budget, Contracts, Money Matters,
Annual Performance Report, Management Integrity, Policy Statement and Strategy
Documents, Employment Information, Environmental Terms
                       WE WELCOME YOUR COMMENTS!

   Thank you for your interest in the Environmental Protection Agency's FY 2000 Annual Report. We
welcome your comments on how we can make this report a more informative document for our readers. We
are particularly interested in your comments on the usefulness of the information and the manner in which
it is presented. Please send your comments to 2000AR.OCFO@epa.gov or write to:
                        Office of Planning, Analysis, and Accountability
                     Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) (2721A)
                              Environmental Protection Agency
                               1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
                                   Washington, DC 20460

   This report is available on OCFO's homepage at: http://www.epa.gov/ocfo, through EPA's National
Service Center for Environmental  Publications at 1-800-490-9198, or by  ordering online at:
http://www.epa.gov/ncepihom.

-------
Photo Acknowledgments:
Cover:           Photo of American Falls, Niagara Falls, NY
                Aikne Bragg
                Office of Chief Financial Officer/Annual Planning and Budget Division
Section I:        Cherry Blossoms at the Tidal Basin, Washington, DC
                KathySedlak O'Brien
Section II:       The Florida Aquarium's Wetlands Gallery, Tampa, FL
                Margo Lagana
Section III:       Fall Foliage at Teddy Roosevelt's Home, Oyster Bay, NY
                Kate Donaldson
Section IV:       Winter Wonder - The Last Shot, Centreville, VA
                Piyachat Terrell

-------