\
LU
o
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Fiscal Year 2001
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.
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.
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
* Reflects 1997 Strategic Plan goal language, under which FY 2001 performance was conducted. Goal language has since been updated.
.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
MESSAGE FROM THE ADMINISTRATOR
I am pleased to provide the United States Environmental Protection Agency's FY 2001 Annual Report,
which gives a comprehensive look at the Agency's program and financial performance for the past fiscal year.
I believe the report will help Congress and the public assess the Agency's progress in protecting human health
and the environment and using taxpayer dollars wisely.
I take pride in the achievements of the Agency in FY 2001. In particular, the Agency's leadership role in
the aftermath of the September llth terrorist attacks in New York City and at the Pentagon demonstrated the
importance and effectiveness of our emergency response capabilities. We continue this work today, providing
expertise on cleanup methods for hazardous materials and help with environmental monitoring at the site of
the attacks and at locations affected by anthrax bioterrorism. In addition, EPA plays a vital role in the
government-wide homeland security effort to prevent and prepare for future attacks by helping to improve our
ability to respond to chemical and biological incidents and protect our water infrastructure.
In addition to these high-profile response efforts, the Agency continued its other core work to protect
human health and the environment, and we have advanced these goals through effective management of the
Agency and its resources. As a result, more citizens than ever before are enjoying the benefits of a cleaner
environment.
Within the Agency, we are working to strengthen the use of environmental and performance information
in annual and long-term planning and priority setting, focusing resources on areas of greatest concern and
managing our work to achieve measurable results. Serving as the baseline for planning, a thorough review of
our results helps us and our partners to determine where we are making progress and identify where we may
need to adjust our strategies. My overall assessment of our FY 2001 performance is that we are on track to
meet our longer-term goals and objectives, and that we are learning from both successes and challenges and
making necessary adjustments.
Much of the progress described in the report is a direct result of contributions by our federal, state, local,
and tribal partners. Ensuring strong and creative partnerships was a significant focus in FY 2001, and it
continues to be a top priority. As a former Governor, I know the importance of providing opportunities for
flexibility and innovation to solve local problems in addition to achieving national results. Toward this end,
I will continue to support programs such as the brownflelds redevelopment initiative, which has demonstrated
that effective partnerships can result in both economic benefits and environmental results.
Later this year, the Agency will issue its first "State of the Environment" report, which will bring together
a range of indicators to describe the condition of critical environmental and human health concerns
nationwide. To some extent, this information will build on and complement the program performance and
trend data presented in this report. In addition, the development of a broader set of indicators should help us
to set better goals, establish more accurate baselines, communicate our results more effectively to the public,
and, ultimately, provide for stronger protection of human health and the environment.
In closing, I would like to thank the American people for their continued support for achieving a cleaner
environment. It is to the people that we are ultimately accountable, and I know that by working together, we are
certain to accomplish our goal of cleaner air, purer water, and better protected land.
Christine Todd Whitman
Administrator
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
MESSAGE FROM THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
EPA's consolidated Annual Report for FY 2001 presents a comprehensive picture of the Agency's
environmental and financial performance. This format, which addresses a number of reporting requirements as
allowed under the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000, brings together information on the Agency's use of
public resources to solve environmental problems, and the results of environmental programs supported by
those resources. Americans value a clean and safe environment and have the right to know how EPA uses
taxpayer resources to help attain cleaner air, purer water, and safer land. EPA has combined its performance
report with its audited financial statements to provide a full public accounting of the Agency's environmental
and fiduciary activities for the year.
Readers of EPA's Annual Report for FY 2000 were especially generous with their suggestions for
improvements we could make to future reports. Among our partners and stakeholders who took the time to
provide feedback, I would like to thank, in particular, numerous representatives of state and tribal governments
and our colleagues in the Executive and Legislative Branches. These reviewers and others gave us many specific
recommendations to make our Annual Report more useful to the public, more descriptive of the results of our
work, and more forceful in presenting environmental results as the fruit of partnerships across the country and
across governments. As a result, this Annual Report better expresses the progress being made toward strategic
goals and objectives, and contains many more links to internet web sites for readers seeking additional
information on a wide variety of topics. We believe this Report describes in straightforward terms some of the
principal environmental benefits that EPA-supported programs provide to the American public.
This year, while we are working on today's environmental problems and planning for those of the future,
we will also be continuing our efforts to measure and describe results in ways that make sense to the public.
We welcome your suggestions for how we can make our Annual Report for 2002 more interesting, informative,
and useful to readers. We invite your comments via postal or electronic mail at the addresses provided on the
last page of this Report.
Thank you for your interest in EPA's work and your support for the efforts of all government agencies, at
federal, state, tribal, and local levels, to protect America's environment. At EPA, we are proud of our record of
service to the American people and dedicated to achieving, with our many partners, even more positive results
in the year to come.
Linda M. Combs
Chief Financial Officer
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
EPA'S FY 2001 ANNUAL REPORT
CONTENTS
Mission Statement - Strategic Goals Inside Front Cover
Message from the Administrator Feature
Message from the Chief Financial Officer Feature
Contents i
SECTION I - Overview and Analysis 1-1
SECTION II - Performance Results H-l
Goal 1: Clean Air II-l
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water 11-11
Goal 3: Safe Food 11-21
Goal 4: Preventing Pollution and Reducing Risk 11-29
Goal 5: Waste Management 11-41
Goal 6: Reduction of Global and Cross-Border Risks 11-53
Goal 7: Right to Know 11-65
Goal 8: Sound Science 11-73
Goal 9: Credible Deterrent and Greater Compliance 11-83
Goal 10: Effective Management 11-93
SECTION III - Management Accomplishments and Challenges IH-1
FY 2001 Integrity Act Report III-2
Major Management Challenges III-4
FY 2001 Management's Report on Audits 111-10
Major Management Challenges Needing High-Level Agency Attention (OIG) 111-12
SECTION IV - FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-1
Chief Financial Officer's Analysis IV-3
Principal Financial Statements IV-5
OIG's Report on EPA's Fiscal 2001 and 2000 Financial Statements IV-61
www.epa.gov/ocfo Contents
-------
APPENDIX A - Program Evaluations A-l
APPENDIX B - Data Quality for Assessments of FY 2001 Performance B-l
APPENDIX C - EPA Organization Chart C-l
APPENDIX D - Acronyms and Abbreviations D-l
Public Access Inside Back Cover
Report Acquisition and Photo Credits Back Cover
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Section I
Overview
and Analysis
-------
OVERVIEW AND ANALYSIS
INTRODUCTION
The mission of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is to protect human health and to
safeguard the natural environment—air, water, and
land—upon which life depends. The Agency is
committed to making America's air cleaner, water
purer, and land better protected and to working closely
with its federal, state, tribal, and local government
partners; with citizens; and with the regulated
community to accomplish these goals. To carry out its
mission, EPA has established 10 long-term strategic
goals that identify the environmental results the Agency
is working to achieve and reflect the sound financial
and management practices it intends to employ. Each
year, as required under the Government Performance
and Results Act (GPRA), the Agency develops an
annual plan that translates these long-term goals and
objectives into specific actions to be taken and
resources to be used during the fiscal year. EPA is
accountable to the American people for making
progress toward its long-term goals by achieving these
annual performance goals (APGs) and using taxpayer
dollars efficiently and effectively to do so.
To manage its work and resources most effectively
to achieve measurable environmental results, for the
past 3 years EPA has linked its long-term and annual
planning, budgeting, financial accounting, and
performance reporting. For example, EPA has
structured its strategic plan to encompass the full scope
of its workforce and resources and has restructured its
budget and finance processes to mirror strategic goals
and objectives. To this end, the Agency'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, which are
critical to achieving environmental and human health
outcomes. Linking planning, budgeting, and finance
helps EPA to focus resource management 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 taxpayer dollars are applied across
the Agency's strategic goals to support the achievement
of environmental results.
EPA's Fiscal Year 2001 AnnualReport demonstrates
the Agency's accountability to Congress and the
American people. First, the Report describes the
progress that EPA—working with its federal, state,
tribal, and local government partners—made toward
the annual performance goals established in its Fiscal
Year (FY) 2001 Annual Plan and toward its longer
range strategic goals. Next, it discusses major
management challenges EPA faced during the year and
presents the Agency's approaches, solutions, and
accomplishments. Finally, after summarizing EPA's
financial activities and achievements, it presents the
annual financial statements, a portrayal of the Agency's
financial position independently audited by EPA's
Inspector General.
This Overview and Analysis, which addresses
requirements for a "Management's Discussion and
Analysis" of the annual financial statements component
of the Fiscal Year 2001 Annual Report,1 is intended to
provide a broad view of EPA's performance and fiscal
accountability over the year. In discussingperformance
results, it focuses on accomplishments that contributed
to environmental achievements, particularly under EPA's
Goals 1 through 6. The goal chapters that follow in
Section II provide a more extensive discussion of
progress and achievements under all goals. The
Overview and Analysis also presents approaches and
tools the Agency is using to improve results, reviews
EPA's financial accomplishments, and discusses
significant factors that might affect future Agency
operations.
PERFORMANCE RESULTS
During FY 2001 EPA, working with its federal,
state, tribal, and local government partners, continued
to make significant progress toward a healthier
environment—cleaner air, purer water, and better
protected land. The discussion that follows briefly
describes results achieved over the past fiscal year: it
1 Because the Fiscal Year 2001 A.nnual Report consolidates a number of specific
reports, some required components of the "Management's Discussion and
Analysis" are presented in greater detail elsewhere in this report. In particular,
EPAs mission statement and long-range goals appear at the front of the report and
an EPA organization chart is included as Appendix C. For a discussion of the
Agency's performance goals, objectives, and results, refer to 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.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Overview
1-1
-------
highlights environmental achievements, notes Agency
accomplishments in improved management and other
functions, aggregates performance results in terms of
annual performance goals met and missed, and
discusses performance issues and concerns.
Environmental Accomplishments
Under EPA's Clean Air goal, the Agency and its
partners continued to improve air quality and to protect
the health of all the public, including sensitive
populations such as asthmatics, children, and seniors,
from the hazards of air pollution. Since the Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990 EPA and its partners have
dramatically reduced air pollution from mobile and
stationary sources to meet the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) and have reduced acid
rain and toxic air pollution to safeguard public health
and the environment. Sulfur dioxide (SO^ and nitrogen
oxide (NOx) gases, for example, form fine particles
that, when inhaled, contribute to premature mortality,
chronic bronchitis, and other respiratory problems and,
in the environment, form haze resulting in decreased
visibility.
During FY 2001 people who lived in all counties in
which concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO^ or
SO2 were measured breathed air that met NAAQS for
these pollutants. Today all areas of the country are in
attainment for NO2; compared to 1990, fewer than
half as many people live in counties where monitored
air quality exceeds the NAAQS for carbon monoxide;
and only 1.5 million people live in counties where lead
levels exceed the NAAQS. In terms of ozone, air
quality continues to improve: nearly half the areas out
of attainment with the 1-hour NAAQS for ozone in
1991 have been brought into attainment and have
approved maintenance plans.
In FY 2001 EPA issued far-reaching rules that will
dramatically reduce pollution from heavy-duty trucks
and buses and cut sulfur levels in diesel fuel, thereby
providing the cleanest running heavy-duty trucks in
history. These vehicles will be 90 percent cleaner than
today's trucks and buses, resulting in an annual
reduction of 2.6 million tons of NO emissions by
X •*
calendar year 2030. In addition, during calendar year
2000 EPA's Acid Ram Program controlled annual SO2
emissions from utility sources to 11.2 million tons.
Compared to the 17.5 million tons released in 1980,
this reduction represents a decrease of 6.3 million tons
in annual emissions and puts the Agency well on the
way to achieving its 2010 goal of reducing SO2
emissions to 8.5 million tons per year. Further, the Acid
Rain Program reduced annual NO emissions from
coal-fired utility sources by more than 2 million tons
below those that would have occurred in the absence
of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. In the area
of air toxics, as of FY 2001 emissions from area,
mobile, and stationary sources had decreased by
35 percent from the 1993 baseline of 4.3 million tons.
During FY 2001 EPA continued its work to ensure
that all people have drinking water that is clean and safe
to drink; that the Nation's rivers, lakes, wetlands,
aquifers, and coastal and ocean waters are healthy; and
that watersheds and aquatic ecosystems will be restored
and protected. Although population growth, as well as
urban and rural nonpoint source pollution, continues to
challenge the capability of community water systems to
provide safe drinking water, in FY 2001, 91 percent of
people served by community water systems received
water that complied with all health-based standards. In
addition, during FY 2001 drinking water facilities
completed 469 infrastructure improvement projects to
help maintain this high level of public health protection.
Ensuring protection of America's land unites a
variety of efforts under a number of the Agency's
strategic goals. Throughout FY 2001 EPA worked
closely with its federal, state, tribal, and local
government partners to ensure that the public has food
that is safe to eat and are protected from health threats
posed by pesticide residues. The Agency expanded the
availability of reduced-risk pesticides and alternatives to
organophosphates to reduce health and environmental
risks from pesticide use while maintaining the vigor of
the country's agricultural production. In addition to
preventing pollution from pesticides and other
chemicals, the Agency continued its work to reduce risk
in communities, homes, workplaces, and ecosystems.
Culminating more than 5 years of work, in FY 2001
the Agency promulgated the Lead Hazard Rule, which
defines specific levels of lead in dust and soil to be
considered "lead-based paint hazards." EPA estimates
that, as response actions are taken in homes that exceed
these standards, approximately 46 million children will
benefit from reduced exposure to lead in paint, dust,
and soil over the next 50 years.
Critical to protecting the Nation's land are better
waste management, restoration of contaminated sites,
1-2
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
and rapid and effective response to waste-related or
industrial accidents and emergencies. In FY 2001 EPA's
Emergency Response Program responded rapidly and
effectively to the terrorist incidents of September 11
and to subsequent acts of bioterrorism. EPA
employees were on the ground within hours of the
attacks at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon,
monitoring for contamination, assisting with waste
management, advising on cleanup and decontamination,
and providing information to the public. At the World
Trade Center, EPA assumed the lead role for
coordination of the federal hazardous materials
response. When outbreaks of anthrax bioterrorism
occurred in early October 2001, EPA response
personnel were among the first on the scene. They led
the effort to clean up and decontaminate six post
offices in Florida and four Congressional office
buildings in Washington, DC—the Ford, Longworth,
Dirksen, and Hart buildings. Because of their expertise
in environmental matters, EPA criminal investigators
assisted the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the
investigation of the attack.
Apart from these emergency situations, the Agency,
working cooperatively with states, tribes, and the
regulated community, continued to improve
environmental conditions and protect human health by
cleaning up hazardous waste sites and seeking to return
abandoned or underutilized industrial and commercial
properties to productive use. In FY 2001 the
Superfund Program achieved 47 construction
completions. ("Construction completion" refers to the
point at which a site remedy is in place, safeguards
prevent the spread of further contamination, and no
further cleanup construction is needed.) The Superfund
Program also cleaned up 2 million cubic yards of solid
hazardous waste and 68,000 gallons of liquid-based
waste as a result of removal response actions. The
Agency and its partners provided alternative drinking
water supplies to 1,000 people at 6 sites. Additionally,
EPA cleaned up 302 Superfund removal sites and
19,074 leakingunderground storage tanks. From the
program's inception through the third quarter of
FY 2001, EPA's Brownfields Program, one of the
Agency's most successful public partnerships, leveraged
more than $3.73 billion in public and private
investments and helped create more than 17,000 jobs in
cleanup, construction, and redevelopment.
EPA continued to work with other nations and to
lead multilateral efforts to reduce global and cross-
border environmental risks. For example, the Agency
and its partners made significant progress in protecting
and improving environmental conditions in the Great
Lakes region, removing or containing more than
400,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediments in
FY 20002; releasing the State of the Great Lakes 2001
report, for which more than 50 governmental and
nongovernmental entities used 33 indicators to assess
the health of the Great Lakes; and demonstrating glass
furnace technology on 70 tons of Fox River sediment
near Green Bay, Wisconsin. (Glass furnace technology
destroys organic contaminants and immobilizes
inorganic metals in a glass matrix that can then be used
as construction fill or for other beneficial uses.)
Results reported in FY 2001 demonstrate that
EPA's voluntary ENERGY STAR program, methane
outreach programs, and High Global Warming
Potential (HGWP) environmental stewardship program
have increased the penetration of energy-efficient
products into the marketplace through effective
program planning, implementation, and outreach to
manufacturers and consumers. The ENERGY STAR
label, for example, has become a national symbol for
energy efficiency recognized by more than 40 percent
of the people. These voluntary programs yield an
immediate impact on environmental improvement. In
results reported in FY 2000, actions taken through
EPA's voluntary climate programs such as ENERGY STAR
have saved consumers and businesses more than
$8 billion on their energy bills and saved 74 billion
kilowatt-hours and more than 10,000 megawatts of
peak power. In addition, emissions of almost 160,000
tons of smog-forming NOx were prevented in 2000,
equivalent to the annual emissions from more than 100
power plants.
Finally, EPA's ongoing efforts to promote and
monitor compliance and to enforce environmental
statutes and regulations continued to advance results in
environmental and human health protection. For
example, in FY 2001 EPA reached settlements with
four major petroleum refiners to resolve significant
areas of noncompliance with the Clean Air Act. The
settlements, adding pollution controls and operation
changes at 27 separate refineries representing
approximately 28.8 percent of the Nation's domestic
1 During FY 2001 new FY 2000 performance data became available for several EPA
programs for which there were delayed reporting cycles or targets set beyond
FY 2000. These FY 2000 data represent the Agency's latest results information;
FY 2001 data will become available in spring 2002.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
1-3
-------
refining capacity, will result in an estimated annual
reduction of 87,000 tons of SOx, 49,500 tons of NOx,
8,220 tons of volatile organic compounds, and 2,100
tons of particulate matter (PM). In addition, the
companies will spend $12 million in a variety of
Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) to
improve the environment. The SEPs will provide a
variety of environmental benefits, including
dissemination of information to the public about local
environmental issues, additional ambient monitoring,
and increased facility controls. One creative SEP will
support an effort to reduce emissions from school
buses, while another will provide for enhanced public
access to permit and compliance information.
Other Agency Accomplishments
To carry out its mission and achieve environmental
and human health results, EPA must function effectively
as an organization, serve the public responsively and
efficiently, work well with its partners and stakeholders,
and make the most of its resources—such as quality
environmental information and sound science—to
inform decision making and advance its efforts. During
FY 2001 EPA expanded its multiyear planning to
address all major research programs and to allow
better assessment of progress toward its strategic
research objectives. The Agency continued to improve
the collection, quality, and availability of environmental
information and to develop and apply the best
available science, an improved understanding of
environmental risk, and greater innovation to detect
emerging risks and to address environmental problems.
For example, for EPAs on-line Integrated Risk
Information System, the Agency completed or updated
seven consensus human health assessments that describe
the potential impacts of various chemicals found in the
environment. This information will be used for hazard
and dose-response evaluations in risk assessments
across EPA, at the state level, and by the public and will
provide information critical to developing EPAs
regulatory standards and making site cleanup decisions.
Similarly, in FY 2001 EPA completed a 5-year pilot of
the Environmental Technology Verification program,
through which the Agency can provide verified,
commercial-ready technologies that eliminate, minimize,
or control high-risk pollutants from multiple sectors.
In the area of improved management, EPAs most
significant accomplishments reflect strides in strategic
management of resources, as the Agency prepared to
address the President's Management Agenda.
Specifically EPA developed a human capital strategic
plan, "Investing in Our People: EPAs Strategy for
Human Capital, 2001 through 2003." In preparing the
plan, Agency executives and human resources
professionals worked in partnership to fine-tune goals,
key strategies, and actions to address human resources.
In FY 2001 EPA capitalized on the power of the
Internet by implementing electronic processes that
allow citizens, grantees, and vendors to transact business
with the Agency on-line 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Summary of Performance Data
In FY 2001 EPA met 65 percent of the APGs for
which data are provided in this report. (EPA
committed to a total of 70 APGs in its FY 2001
Annual Plan; however, because data for 9 of these
APGs will not be available until FY 2002 or later, they
are not included in these tallies.) EPA also made
significant progress toward the 20 APGs that were not
achieved in FY 2001, and the Agency remains on track
to meet the long-term goals and objectives associated
with these annual targets.
During FY 2001 new performance data also
became available for FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs for
which there were delayed reporting cycles or targets set
beyond those fiscal years. EPA now has performance
data for five of the nine FY 2000 APGs for which
there were delayed reporting cycles or targets set
beyond FY 2000. For example, the Agency met its
goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and
restricting consumption of ozone depleting substances.
In summary, EPA can now report achievement of 81
percent (56) of the 69 APGs for which it has FY 2000
performance data. In addition, new performance data
became available during FY 2001 for three of the
seven FY 1999 APGs for which there were delayed
reporting cycles or targets set beyond FY 1999. For
FY 1999, EPA can now report achievement of 52 of
the 65 APGs for which it has performance data. Delays
in reporting cycles and targets set beyond the fiscal year
continue to affect four FY 2000 APGs and four
FY 1999 APGs.
Charts presenting EPAs FY 2001 performance
results are provided with each goal chapter in
Section II. These charts present performance data for
each of the Agency's FY 2001 APGs.
1-4
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Performance Issues and Concerns
Despite the best efforts of EPA and its partners,
the Agency was not able to meet all planned targets for
FY 2001. However, the Agency does not expect the
shortfall in meeting these APGs to compromise
progress toward achieving its long-range goals and
objectives. For more than half of the missed APGs,
EPA fell only slightly short of the targets and met the
cumulative goals.
External factors contributed to over 75 percent of
the missed APGs. For example, under its Clean Air
goal, EPA sets targets for both the number of areas
that will move from nonattainment to attainment for
the six principal air pollutants and the number of
people who will breathe cleaner air as a result. In
FY 2001 EPA anticipated that five areas would request
redesignation from nonattainment to attainment for the
1-hour ozone standard; however, only three areas were
redesignated. States have been reluctant to request
redesignation to the current 1-hour ozone standard as
long as legal issues remain to be resolved by the courts
concerning the more protective 8-hour standard that
will replace the 1-hour standard. Despite this
uncertainty, however, EPA and states continue to work
together to ensure that areas are striving to meet or are
maintaining the current 1-hour ozone standard.
For some missed APGs, shortfalls cannot be
attributed to a single reason. For example, under the
Agency's Clean Water goal, EPA missed its target for
issuing National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permits for major and minor point
sources. NPDES permits reduce or eliminate
discharges into the Nation's waters of inadequately
treated wastewater from municipal and industrial
facilities and of pollutants from urban storm water,
combined sewer overflows, and concentrated animal
feeding operations. In FY 2001 the Agency and its
partners exceeded the target for permitting minor point
sources, achieving 75 percent of a planned 66 percent;
however, permits issued covered only 75 percent of
the targeted 89 percent of major point sources. Many
factors contributed to the permit backlog and missed
target, including permit appeals and challenges, states'
lack of or redirection of resources, newly adopted
water quality standards that are increasingly
comprehensive and more stringent, and the need to
integrate individual permits with watershed and other
planning processes.
In many cases, missed APGs represent "near
misses." One such example falls under the Agency's
leaking underground storage tank (LUST) program,
which is responsible for cleaning up releases from
underground storage tank systems containing gasoline,
other petroleum products, or hazardous substances. In
FY 2001 EPA and its state partners completed 19,074
cleanups, for a total of nearly 270,000 cleanups since
FY 1987. The FY 2001 target of 21,000 LUST
cleanups was not met, however, because of the
increasing complexity of sites where contaminated
groundwater has migrated off-site or which require
groundwater cleanup. In addition, many cleanups were
complicated by the presence of the contaminant methyl
tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), a gasoline additive. These
factors have resulted in longer-than-expected cleanup
times and higher-than-expected cleanup costs at LUST
sites.
In all, EPA and its partners did not meet 20 of the
61 APGs for which performance data are currently
available. These APGs are associated with 7 of EPA's
10 strategic goals. The Agency is considering the varied
causes of these shortfalls—legal issues; implementation
of new, more stringent regulations or requirements;
redirection or shortages of staff and resources;
unforeseen technical complexities in cleanup or
remediation processes; and other factors—as it adjusts
its work and APGs for FY 2002 and proceeds to plan
and set priorities for FY 2003 and beyond. The
performance data charts included in Section II provide
more complete information on these missed targets
and discuss the progress the Agency has made toward
its goals.
IMPROVING RESULTS
During FY 2001 EPA continued to sharpen its
focus on achieving re suits and improving performance.
In August 2001 the Agency launched an effort to
examine a number of its current management
practices—including priority-setting; planning and
budgeting; and performance tracking, measuring, and
reporting—with an eye toward strengthening these
processes and improving the way the Agency works
with its partners to focus resources on areas of greatest
concern and achieve better results. In addition, the
Agency continues to advance its work by strengthening
its partnerships, further developing its capability to
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Overview
1-5
-------
conduct and apply the results of program evaluation
activities, improving performance tracking and
measurement, addressing data quality issues, and
looking ahead to anticipate future trends and issues.
Strengthening Partnerships
The advances in protection of human health and
the environment made over the past year and discussed
in the goal chapters that follow would not have been
possible without the participation and collaboration of
the Agency's federal, state, and tribal partners. During
FY 2001 EPA worked in particular to strengthen its
partnership with states and tribes to focus on
environmental results and make more effective use of
collective resources. In spring 2001, for example, states
and tribes participated in the Agency's FY 2003
planning and priority-settingprocess and in a May
"lessons learned" forum on improving the Agency's
annual performance report.
In August 2001 Administrator Christine Todd
Whitman initiated an effort to advance EPA-state
performance partnerships under the National
Environmental Performance Partnership System
(NEPPS). Within the limits of its statutory and
regulatory authorities, EPA is working to provide the
states with as much flexibility as possible to address
state priorities and achieve the greatest environmental
results. During FY 2001 EPA Regional Administrators
began to meet individually with state leaders to
maximize the opportunities available through
negotiation of performance partnership agreements
and grants. Discussions focused on the flexibility
available under performance partnerships, creating
additional incentives for participation, and the testing of
better measures of program performance. In FY 2001
EPA also began to consult closely with states on two
new initiatives to promote achievement of
environmental results: designing a strategy for
developing and applying innovative approaches
("Innovating for Better Environmental Results") and
developing an "Information Agenda" that will establish
a strategic vision and goals for the role of information
in environmental programs in the coming years.
EPA also continues to work closely with tribal
governments to identify priorities for Indian Country,
to improve management of environmental issues, and
to develop tribal capability to implement environmental
programs. EPA's Indian Program involves significant
cross-Agency and multimedia activities designed to
ensure that the Agency's trust responsibility to federally
recognized tribes is carried out.
In July 2001 Administrator Whitman met with the
Tribal Operations Committee to reaffirm the Agency's
Indian Policy and the Tribal Operations Committee
Charter. The Indian Policy outlines the Agency's firm
commitment to principles that promote partnerships
with tribes as an integral part of EPA's system to carry
out its mission of environmental protection. The re-
signing of the Tribal Operations Committee Charter
further demonstrates the Administration's support for
EPA-tribal government partnerships. EPA is committed
to ensuringprotection of the environment and human
health in Indian Country in a manner that is consistent
with the government-to-government relationship and
conserves cultural use of natural resources.
EPA also continued to collaborate closely with
other federal agencies on a variety of efforts, from
research and development projects to the design and
implementation of cooperative programs to advance
protection of the environment and human health. For
example, under the Agency's National Coastal
Assessment Program, EPA, the U.S. National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, and U.S. Geological
Survey laboratories in the Southern Atlantic and Gulf
of Mexico regions worked with the Delaware River
Basin Committee and 24 of 26 coastal-marine states
and tribes to assess the condition of the Nation's
coastal resources. In another joint effort to develop
information and analytical methods that will improve
EPA's economic analyses of its policies and regulations,
the Agency worked with the National Science
Foundation on solicitations designed to support
economic research in a number of key areas.
Apart from such research initiatives, EPA continued
to develop and implement environmental programs in
partnership with its sister agencies. An important area
of collaboration, for example, involves the cleanup of
federal sites. During FY 2001 EPA worked with the
U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of
Energy, and other federal agencies to complete
construction at 3 Superfund sites, to complete cleanups at
28 removal sites, and to sign 4 interagency agreements
to obtain enforceable cleanup commitments. In the area
of protecting human health, EPA and the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) developed a national
advisory for children and women of childbearing age
1-6
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
on mercury in commercial and noncommercial fish.
EPA and FDA, in cooperation with the Centers for
Disease Control, distributed the advisory throughout
the U.S. medical community.
Examples of significant partnership efforts with
federal agencies, states, tribes, and local governments
are highlighted in the individual goal chapters in
Section II.
Using Program Evaluation
During FY 2001 EPA made significant strides in
building Agency-wide capability to conduct program
evaluation and fostering the use of program evaluation
as a management tool for continuous improvement.
These efforts will help EPA keep pace with the rapidly
expanding evaluation activities conducted at the state
level and with the emergence of Environmental
Program Evaluation as a nationally recognized
subdiscipline of program evaluation. For example, in
FY 2001 EPAs Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
and Office of Research and Development (ORD)
participated in a joint pilot program evaluation focused
on the Agency's pollution prevention and new
technologies research program. The pilot used a "logic
model," which allows evaluators to identify
relationships among resources, activities, outputs,
customers, and outcomes, to assess environmental
research within the context of the Agency's strategic
goals and objectives. The pilot demonstrated the
potential benefits of apartnership approach to
program evaluation and pointed out the need to focus
on outcomes to identify the impacts of research on
long-term environmental results.
To continue to foster such program evaluation
efforts, EPA has developed a Program Evaluation
Network of more than 50 members who actively
promote program evaluation within the Agency. In
addition, EPA has accelerated the application of
evaluation practice within the Agency by centrally
funding internal evaluations on a competitive basis.
From the FY 2001 competition, the Agency selected 6
out of 23 proposals for funding, allowing evaluation
of a variety of environmental programs. These
evaluations are underway and will be reported in the
FY 2002 Annual Report.
Improving Environmental Indicators and
Performance Measurement
EPA recognizes the need to make greater use of
outcome-oriented performance goals and measures.
Therefore, the Agency has continued to invest in the
development of environmental indicator, monitoring,
and management systems that will improve its
capability to measure results, plan accordingly, and
manage its work to achieve environmental and health
outcomes. During FY 2001 EPA initiated a variety of
projects to improve performance measurement:
conducting training and workshops; preparing analyses
to support development of more outcome-oriented
goals and measures; benchmarking performance
measures used by other agencies with similar functions;
and working with its federal, state, tribal, and local
government partners and with other stakeholders to
improve environmental indicators and measures.
For example, to increase national and state
capabilities for strategic monitoring of ecological
health, EPA worked with 24 states to complete the first
national survey of coastal waters, completed an
integrated assessment of the Mid-Atlantic Highlands,
and initiated the Western Pilot Study to demonstrate the
use of ecological indicators for streams in the 12
western states. Approximately 30 states are evaluating
new monitoring designs and a core set of ecological
indicators that provide consistent data on quality of the
environment and identify changes takingplace. Regional
vulnerability analyses that use socioeconomic factors to
forecast environmental conditions more reliably are
being tested in forests in the eastern United States.
In addition, through its Science to Achieve Results
competitive research grants, EPA established five
Estuarine and Great Lakes Programs at major
academic research institutions with coastal expertise.
These institutions will work to develop the next
generation of environmental indicators for use by the
states in assessing the biological health of estuaries and
the Great Lakes.
In FY 2001 a cooperative agreement between EPA
and Florida State University (FSU) supported the
"Chemical and Pesticides Results Measures" project and
its first published report. The purpose of the project is
to develop a set of environmental outcome indicators
and measures for toxic substances, pesticides, and
pollution prevention. By working in cooperation with
FSU, stakeholders, and the Pollution Prevention
www. epa.gov/ocfo
1-7
-------
Roundtable, EPA will identify indicators and measures
that federal, state, and local agencies; tribal entities; and
others will find useful in describing, measuring, and
understanding environmental trends and conditions in
response to environmental programs. Data generated
from this project, targeted to a broad audience of
potential users, will be used in improving FY 2002 and
FY 2003 annual performance goals and measures. The
second phase of the project will provide a foundation
for additional work on environmental indicators.
The Agency completed several other indicators
projects during FY 2001, including the report
Development, Selection, and Pilot Demonstration of Preliminary
Enwronmentallndicatorsforthe Clean Water State Evolving
Fund. The product of a joint EPA/state work group,
the report demonstrated the feasibility of applying a set
of 7 environmental indicators to 62 State Revolving
Fund projects in 6 states.
Addressing Data Quality Problems
While data quality continues to present a significant
management challenge for EPA, the Agency's FY 2001
performance data generally can be considered
acceptably reliable and complete, according to criteria
established by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) and discussed in OMB Circular A-ll. (See
Appendix B for a more complete discussion of data
quality issues.) Most of the Agency's performance data
are collected in major EPA data systems that are subject
to Agency-wide data quality standards and periodic
audits for accuracy and completeness. As indicated in
Appendix B, some common limitations in the
performance data are inconsistencies in data collection
methods among multiple data sources; inaccuracies due
to imprecise measurement or unrepresentative statistical
sampling; and uncertainties associated with survey,
voluntarily reported, or modeled data. The Agency is
committed to full disclosure of these limitations and is
working to make significant improvements in its quality
systems. For many measures, EPA relies on states and
other external sources for performance data and the
quality assurance/quality control protocols already in
place. The Agency is making significant efforts to
engage its partners in improving detection and
correction of data error, standardizing measures, and
improving the exchange of electronic data and data
quality information.
EPA's performance data used to determine
whether APGs have been attained are complete for
most performance measures. (See performance data
charts provided with each goal chapter in Section II.)
Where performance data are not yet available,
Appendix B indicates when complete data are
expected.
During FY 2001 EPA undertook several initiatives
to improve the quality of environmental data used to
support performance measurement. For example,
• In response to the EPA OIG's declaration of
laboratory quality systems as one of the Agency's
top 10 "management challenges," independent
technical assessments of EPA laboratories were
conducted to determine whether laboratory
operating systems are producing environmental
data of known and documented quality. The
assessments identified a number of "best
practices" that are being shared across the
laboratory community.
• EPA worked with the American Council of
Independent Laboratories to develop
environmental laboratory ethical standards and
train public and private sector laboratory staff
and managers on ethical conduct.
• EPA developed the Data and Information Quality
Strategic Plan which, when implemented, will
improve the measurement and quality of the
Agency's data and information over the next 5 to
10 years. The plan provides six overarching
recommendations: (1) create an Agency-wide
information quality network to clarify the roles,
responsibilities, and relationships of Agency
staff having data quality functions; (2) develop and
require the use of standard data quality indicator
metadata; (3) improve implementation of quality
assurance requirements for grantees; (4) regularly
assess and report on standard quality measures
throughout the information life-cycle; (5) expand
quality training for EPA and grantees; and (6)
provide guidelines to improve information use and
product development. The plan represents one
Agency response to a major management challenge
identified by the General Accounting Office and
EPA's OIG. (See Section III, "Management
Accomplishments and Challenges," for further
discussion.) Further Agency responses to this
challenge include implementation of the Central
Data Exchange (CDX), which allows the seamless,
secure exchange of quality data between EPA and
1-8
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
its industrial and governmental partners. Three EPA
programs (Toxics Release Inventory, Air, and
Drinking Water) now use the CDX.
• EPA adopted a government-wide standard for
quality system requirements for contractors and
grantees and issued interim guidelines for its use.
The Agency is now revising its official policy.
• EPA reviewed 14 organizational Quality
Management Plans (QMPs) and approved 9.
QMPs, which describe data quality management
responsibilities, are required for every EPA
organization that collects or uses environmental
data. The Agency scheduled follow-up
assessments of QMP implementation. EPA also
reviewed eight quality systems.
• EPA undertook a formal assessment of Agency-
wide, quality-related training needs. The Agency
also made progress in improving data quality
under specific programs.
While undertaking long-term improvements in data
quality, it is important for EPA to disclose the
limitations of its data supporting specific goals and
measures, as reflected in Appendix B. EPAs long-term
strategies—including the Data and Information Quality
StrategicPlan—will address recognized Agency
vulnerabilities in data quality management within and
across programs.
Considering Future Trends
Apart from long-standing environmental
protection issues, new areas of focus will challenge
EPAs ability to look to the future and plan strategically.
The future will likely be characterized by increased rates
of change and greater uncertainty about the responses
of complex biological, ecological, social, and political
systems to this rapid change. EPA is exploring ways to
keep pace with these developments by looking ahead
to gain a better understanding of potential threats to
ecological and human health. Issues such as global
warming, biotechnology, or threats to biodiversity will
require the forging of new cooperative relationships
with EPAs federal, state, tribal, and local government
partners and with the Agency's stakeholders.
The collective perspective about what actually
constitutes "the environment" also is changing. As we
begin to appreciate the extent to which humans depend
on the ecological systems of the planet, it is becoming
clear that numerous issues, previously thought of as
independent of the environment, are in fact connected
to it. Human health, the economy, social justice, and
national security—particularly in terms of the potential
for ecoterrorism—all have important environmental
aspects because each is dependent to some degree on
the structure, functioning, and resiliency of ecological
systems.
In today's world, population growth and the
resources consumed to sustain this growth are altering
the earth in unprecedented ways. Over the next
25 years, for example, the world's population will grow
by nearly 2 billion people, largely in developing areas.
By 2025 an estimated 2.7 billion people will live in areas
experiencing severe water scarcity, creating a potential
for major regional conflicts over water rights.
Domestically, growth in the southern and southwestern
regions will pose major water management issues:
water and wastewater infrastructure maintenance,
aquifer depletion, and prevention of surface water
contamination.
Further, as the population continues to grow, the
Agency's general environmental concerns, such as air
quality, are likely to continue. Urbanization of
previously underdeveloped areas will potentially
generate a greater demand for transportation
infrastructure, leading to increases in vehicle miles
traveled and emissions of conventional pollutants and
greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide.
As EPA looks to the future, it will need to employ
innovative approaches and sound science to investigate
complex, interdisciplinary problems in environmental
protection. The Agency will need to expand its efforts
for interagency and international cooperation to address
environmental issues on an increasingly global scale.
Considering energy efficiency and the impacts of
energy use—from global climate change to acid rain
and multi-pollutant air emissions—promoting closed-
loop manufacturing technologies to prevent or reduce
pollution, and encouraging design for the environment
are among the strategies the Agency is now exploring.
LOOKING AHEAD
As noted earlier, in August 2001 EPA launched a
new effort to examine and strengthen its current
management practices to achieve better results. As part
of this "Managing for Improved Results" initiative,
www. epa.gov/ocfo
vervicw and Analysis
1-9
-------
during FY 2002 a Steering Group of senior Agency
leaders will consider options for imp roving EPA's
strategic planning, annual planning and budgeting
processes, performance measurement, and capability to
implement results-based management. As a result of
this work, the Agency expects both to make
incremental changes to its processes and systems and to
effect far-reaching reforms that improve the way it
works with its partners to achieve environmental results.
The Agency continues to strive toward making
more effective use of performance and results
information to inform internal planning and
decision-making and to inform the public. In
FY 2001 EPA initiated an Agency-wide
"Environmental Indicators Initiative" to gather the
information it needs to evaluate its progress and
make sound, strategic decisions. Environmental
indicators are used to track and measure the
environment's capacity to support human and
ecological health. EPA and others will use indicators
such as ozone concentrations, nutrient levels exported
from watersheds, and blood lead concentrations to
describe and assess conditions, stressors, exposure, and
response and to showprogress toward meeting
management or performance goals. In FY 2002 EPA
plans to compile the indicators information it collects
to develop the Agency's first State of the Environment
Report.
Applying Lessons Learned
EPA is using its FY 2001 results to adjust
approaches and develop new strategies for FY 2002
and beyond. In some cases FY 2001 performance
information has indicated a need to revise existing
annual targets. For example, EPA did not achieve its
target for Superfund construction completions in
FY 2001. Several factors account for the FY 2001
decline in completions including the large size and
considerable complexity of remaining sites. Based on
this experience EPA is reducing its FY 2002
construction completion target and Devaluating the
constraints and complexity of remaining Superfund
sites.
On the other hand, based on FY 2001
performance, the Agency expects that in FY 2002 states
will be able to complete more drinking water source
assessments than anticipated. In this case national targets
were originally established when states were in the early
stages of implementing the assessment program and
were focused on the preliminary steps necessary to
establish source water protection programs (hiring staff,
collecting data, setting up databases, presenting plans to
the public). Because states have completed these
preliminary steps, they will likely undertake source water
assessment and prevention activities at a faster pace in
the future.
Similarly, EPA has adjusted several of its criteria
pollutant targets for FY 2002 based on FY 2001 results.
In particular EPA is working with states to ensure that
they continue to make progress toward attaining the
ozone standard as the Agency continues to develop a
policy to make the transition from the 1-hour standard
to the 8-hour standard.
In other cases the lessons EPA has learned from its
FY 2001 performance, although not specifically
affecting goals or targets, will influence program
strategies for the future. For example, to achieve clean
water, the Agency is continuing to meet its goals for the
issuance of effluent limitations guidelines. However, the
Agency recognizes as a continuing challenge its
capability to adequately document actual loadings
reductions given the limited data available. To help
address this problem and implement an overall
loadings reductions strategy, EPA will take steps in
FY 2002 to determine the number of facilities in each
major program. This will greatly improve the Agency's
capability to model expected reductions and validate
these models using the limited data available.
Lessons learned in FY 2001 were similarly helpful
in reevaluating the Agency's Great Lakes Program.
Preliminary 2001 data show dissolved oxygen
concentrations in Lake Erie's central basin to be near
the worst observed during the past 5 years, despite
international success in reducing phosphorus loadings.
To understand and address this puzzling challenge,
EPA's Great Lakes Program is shifting program
emphasis to develop missing information such as
external phosphorus load calculations, to research
further the biological effects, to publicize the problem,
and to integrate research and management efforts
through the Lake Erie Lake Management Plan.
Finally, the unexpected and tragic events of
September 11,2001, have raised new concerns about
the safety of the Agency's workforce. Like other
federal agencies, in FY 2002 EPA will implement a
national initiative to address security vulnerabilities and
I-10
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
risks at all of its facilities. This work might lead to the
identification of new performance goals and measures
under a number of EPA's strategic goals.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
EPA continues to focus on integrating financial
information with program performance information
to strengthen its planning, analysis, and accountability
process. A key goal is to provide program managers
with timely and useful cost information and financial
analysis to better inform the decision-makingprocess
and ensure taxpayer dollars are used effectively and
efficiently in protecting the environment and public
health.
The financial statements provided in Section IV are
one important example of Agency accountability, in
that they provide a snapshot of EPA's financial position
at the end of the fiscal year. These financial statements
are prepared in accordance with established federal
accounting standards and audited by EPA's OIG. The
discussion that follows is a supplement to the financial
statements and describes EPA's resources and how they
are used to accomplish the Agency's mission.
FY 2001 Budgetary Resources: EPA Appropriations
Any discussion of finances begins with the
appropriations process. An appropriation is a legal
authority to spend funds for purposes designated in an
appropriations act. Congress appropriates funding for
EPA in annual legislation covering appropriations for
Appropriations by Fiscal Year
the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department
of Housing and Urban Development, and
Independent Agencies. For FY 2001 EPA's
appropriated resources totaled $7.8 billion.
As indicated in the chart, three appropriations—
Environmental Programs and Management (EPM),
State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG), and
Superfund—continue to make up a substantial portion
of the Agency's resources. The EPM appropriation
funds most of the Agency's payroll and infrastructure.
As its title implies, STAG primarily funds grants to state
and tribal partners for carrying out their environmental
programs. The Superfund appropriation funds cleanup
of abandoned hazardous waste sites. Finally, "All
Other" EPA appropriations include funding for Science
and Technology, Buildings and Facilities, Office of
Inspector General, and a number of smaller
appropriation accounts.
Obligations and Costs
For FY 2001 EPA is reportingboth obligations
and costs incurred in performance of its 10 goals. This
presentation should provide a better link between the
funds budgeted and the resources actually used to
accomplish each goal.
EPA's budget execution can be viewed in two ways: as
obligations and as costs. Obligations reflect legal authority
and commitments to incur costs on the part of the
government. For example, an obligation is recognized
when the government awards a contract or a grant. In
contrast, costs are recognized when the contractor actually
delivers the requested goods or services. By reporting
obligations, EPA can show the use of its budgetary
resources in terms of contractual commitments made
to achieve its environmental goals, and costs measure
the obligated resources actually consumed during the
reporting period in achieving its goals.
FY 2001 obligations incurred in connection with
EPA's 10 goals are presented in the FY 2001
Obligations by Goal chart.3 FY 2001 costs incurred to
achieve the Agency's 10 goals total $8.1 billion and are
summarized in the Costs by Goal chart.4
1998
1999
2000
2001
3 The total obligations in the chart differ from amounts reported in the Agency's
financial statements in Section IV because of different accounting and presentation
requirements. The basis for the chart is consistent with Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) budgetary guidance, whereas the financial statements are based on
generally accepted accounting principles.
4 The chart indicates EPA's gross costs. EPA's "net" costs are reported in Section IV.
under "Statement of Net Costs." "Net" costs are defined as the gross costs offset
by associated exchange revenues, e.g. Superfund cost recoveries and user fees.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Overview and Analysis
Ml
-------
FY 2001 OBLIGATIONS BY GOAL
(Dollars in Millions)
Appropriation
State & Tribal
Assistance Grants
All Other
Superfund
TOTAL
% of Total
G-1
218
341
0
559
6.21
G-2
3,006
574
0
3,580
39.75
G-3
0
95
0
95
1.05
G-4
100
199
0
299
3.32
G-5
73
274
1,354
1,701
18.89
G-6
127
207
0
334
3.77
G-7
0
167
4
171
1.90
G-8
0
337
3
340
3.77
G-9
72
304
15
391
4.34
G-10
0
367
71
438
4.86
Reim.
30
268
136
434
4.82
Other
0
31*
634**
665
7.38
Total
3,626
3,164
2,217
9,007
100.00
NOTE: Actual costs are reflected in Section IV - Annual Financial Statements
" The $31 million for the All Other appropriations row represents transfers from other federal agencies.
** The $634 million for the Superfund row represents a payment from general revenues to the Hazardous Substance Superfund.
FY 2001 Gross Costs by Goal
G1 Clean Air
6.7%
G10 Effective
Management
6.0%
G9 Credible
Deterrent
4.9%
G8 Sound
Science
4.3%
G7 Right-to-Know
2.1%
G3 Safe Food
1.3%
G4 Preventing
Pollution
3.4%
G6 Global
Risks
2.8%
EPA's obligations and costs are largely incurred for
services performed outside the Agency. As illustrated in
the FY 2001 Cost Categories chart, more than 80 percent
of EPA's costs are in the form of contracts or grants.
Most of EPA's costs are associated with grant
programs, and nearly half of the Agency's grants are
awarded from two state revolving funds (SRFs). The
Clean Water SRF (CWSRF) provides assistance for
wastewater and other water projects, such as those
dealing with nonpoint sources, estuaries, and storm
water. The Drinking Water SRF (DWSRF) provides
financing for improvements to community water
systems to assist compliance with the Safe Drinking
Water Act and also allows states to use grant funds
for other activities that support their drinking water
programs. (See Section II, Goal 2, for more
information on the SRFs.)
FY 2001 Cost Categories
Contra
andIA
Payroll
15.8%
All Other
2.4%
Grants
57.9%
1-12
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
FY 2001 Major Grant Categories
Drinking
Water SRF
15.6%
Superfund
3.8%
Funding for both is awarded as grants to states and
tribes, which then make loans to municipalities and
other entities for construction of infrastructure projects,
purchases of land or conservation easements, and
implementation of other water quality activities.
Additional funds from state match and leveraged bond
proceeds expand the capital available in the SRFs to
address priority water quality and public health needs,
while loan repayments and earnings ensure funding for
these activities far into the future. The flexibility and
revolving nature of the SRFs have provided states with
a powerful tool to apply needed funding toward their
clean water and drinking water infrastructure needs.
Through 2001 CWSRFs have turned $18 billion in
federal capitalization grants into over $34 billion in
assistance to municipalities and other entities for water
projects. In recent years CWSRFs have directed
$3 billion to $4 billion in loan assistance to water
projects. Approximately $200 million of these funds
are used each year to prevent polluted runoff, making
the CWSRF an effective tool in addressingnonpoint
source problems.
Likewise, the newer DWSRFs have turned
$3.6 billion in federal capitalization grants into over
$3.8 billion in loan assistance, ofwhich $1.3 billion was
provided in assistance in FY 2001 alone. States have
also used $576 million of their DWSRF grants to fund
other programs and activities that enhance water system
management and protect sources of drinking water.
The large dollar volume of these two grant
programs is the reason that more than 44 percent of
EPAs costs are incurred in connection with its Clean
and Safe Water goal. Other grant programs include
categorical assistance to states and tribes, consistent with
EPAs authorizing statutes, and research grants to
universities and other nonprofit institutions.
Superfund Financial Trends
The Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA)
established the Superfund Program and the Hazardous
Substance Response Trust Fund, now known as the
Superfund. The Superfund Program addresses the
remediation of hazardous waste from abandoned sites
around the country and emergency response for new
spills and other incidents. Prior to FY 1996 the bulk of
Superfund financing consisted of special taxes.
Although CERCLA has not been reauthorized since it
expired in 1995, the Superfund Program continues to
operate each year. With CERCLAs expiration, the
taxing authority also expired, resulting in a shift of
Superfund financing sources as shown in the
Cumulative Superfund Trust Fund Cost Recoveries,
FY 1996 through FY 2001 chart. Appropriations from
general revenues now constitute the largest share of
Superfund trust fund revenues. At the same time cost
recovery revenues have increased markedly since FY 1991,
when the cumulative total stood at $359 million.
Superfund Trust Fund
Revenue Sources
Taxes
Cost Recoveries
General Fund Transfer
Another
1991
1996
2001
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Overview and Analysis
1-13
-------
$3000
$2500
$2000
$1500
$1000
$500
$0
Cumulative Superfund Trust Fund Cost Recoveries
FY 1996-FY 2001
$2058•
I I I
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
Despite declining revenues to the Superfund Trust
Fund, special account revenues have continued to grow
Under CERCLA Section 122(b)(3), EPA may retain
and use the proceeds it receives under settlement
agreements to conduct response actions at Superfund
sites. Funds received under these settlements are
subsequently placed in interest-bearing, site-specific
accounts known as special accounts. Until recently only
the future cost (or "cashout") component could be
placed in a special account, and any corresponding past
cost (or cost recovery) amounts were deposited in the
Superfund Trust Fund. Based on a recent legal opinion
by EPA's Office of General Counsel, however, it was
determined that both past and future cost amounts
could be placed in special accounts. Combining these
amounts will make more resources readily available
without an appropriation for EPA-lead site responses
and to reimburse responsible parties for response work
performed at sites pursuant to settlement agreements
with the Agency.
As of September 30,2001, EPA had established
197 special accounts with $878 million in receipts. These
accounts earned an additional $135 million in interest.
At the end of FY 2001, EPA had disbursed $326
million from its special accounts and had unliquidated
obligations of $118 million and an unexpended balance
of $569 million.
Accounts Receivable and Debt
Management
Improvement in management of the
federal government's debt portfolio has
been a concern of Congress in the past
decade and is manifested in the 1996
passage of the Debt Collection
Improvement Act, which supplemented
previous authorities for debt management.
EPA's accounts receivable do not
approach the level of other major federal
creditor agencies. The Agency, nonetheless,
manages a gross debt portfolio that
exceeded $1 billion in each of the past 3
fiscal years.
More than three-fourths of EPA's accounts
receivable are Superfund-related. Effective
management of Superfund debts requires close
collaboration between two EPA offices (the Office of
the Chief Financial Officer and the Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance) and the U.S.
Department of Justice (DOJ). As illustrated in the
Accounts Receivable Management chart, EPA
experienced a significant increase in collection of all
debts, delinquent and nondelinquent, from 2000 to
2001. In addition EPA has greatly stepped up its
referral actions of delinquent debts to the appropriate
collection organizations (the U.S. Department of
Treasury for non-Superfund debts and DOJ for
Superfund-related debts), which are set up to take
more aggressive collection action.
Accounts Receivable Management
2000 2001
Referrals
2000 2001
Collections
1-14
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Innovative Environmental Financing: The Advantage
of Public-Private Partnerships
EPA has several innovative environmental financing
initiatives that enable the Agency to leverage federal
funds through mutually beneficial public-private
partnerships. Two examples are the Environmental
Finance Program and the Brownfields Program.
The Environmental Finance Program employs
leveraging to extend its reach and magnify its impact.
The program has three related components that furnish
financial outreach services to Agency customers and the
regulated community. First, the Environmental Financial
Advisory Board (EFAB), a federally chartered advisory
committee, provides innovative ideas and
recommendations to EPAs Administrator and program
offices on ways to lower the costs of, and increase
investments in, environmental and public health
protection. Second, the Environmental Finance Center
(EFC) Network, consisting of nine university-based
programs in eight EPA regions, delivers targeted
technical assistance to smaller communities on the
"how-to-pay" issues of providing safe and reliable
environmental services that meet standards. Third, the
Environmental Financing Information Network
(EFIN), through its popular web site and other means,
catalogs the results of the Advisory Board and the EFC
Network and presents valuable summaries of more
than 350 environmental finance tools and 1,000
abstracts and case studies of environmental finance
publications.
A good example of how the components work
together to leverage results is presented by the EFC
Directors who serve on the Advisory Board as expert
witnesses, thereby bringing their unique perspective on
finance issues and opportunities for the Board to
consider and pass along to EPA. Another innovative
example is the charrette, a panel of experts tailored to
address a community's particular finance problem.
After listening to the community, the panel exchanges
questions and answers and then presents
recommendations for actions the community should
take. The panel is composed of finance experts and has
often included EFAB members. Typically participating
communities would not have access to advice of this
caliber, and many communities have followed panel
recommendations, saving significant resources in
implementing their projects. EPA further leverages the
charrettes by documenting their results and making them
available as case studies through the EFC and EFIN
web sites.
The Brownfields Program, one of EPAs most
successful public-private partnerships, leveraged more
than $3.73 billion in public and private investments and
resulted in more than 17,000 jobs in cleanup,
construction, and redevelopment through the third
quarter of FY 2001. "Brownfields" are abandoned,
idle, or underused industrial and commercial properties
where redevelopment or expansion is complicated by
real or perceived contamination. The primary goal of
EPAs Brownfields Program is to provide states, tribes,
and local governments with the tools and financial
assistance needed to assess, cleanup, and redevelop
Brownfields properties. Since 1995,2,594 properties
have been assessed using federal funds and 876
properties have been assessed using leveraged funds.
The 46 job training and development demonstration
pilots have trained at least 700 participants, and more
than 75 percent of the graduates have obtained
employment to date. (See Section II, Goal 5, for more
information.)
www. epa.gov/ocfo
1-15
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
1-16 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Section II
Performance
Results
-------
Goal 1 FY 2001 Obligations
$559 M
Note: EPA FY2001 Total Obligations
were $9,007 million
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
subsistence depends directly on those ecosystems.
PROGRESS TOWARD STRATEGIC GOAL
AND OBJECTIVES
EPA, working with state, local, tribal, and other
partners, continues to make steady progress toward
the Clean Air goal and objectives. Since 1970 clean
air programs have cut by 29 percent aggregate
emissions of the six principal pollutants tracked
nationally. These results have been achieved using a
combination of regulatory actions, voluntary
measures, market mechanisms, state partnerships,
and stakeholder negotiations, often incorporating
SIX PRINCIPAL POLLUTANTS
Ozone (O3)
Particulate Matter (PA/I)
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Nitrogen Dioxide
Sulfur Dioxide
Lead (Pb)
Comparison of Growth Areas and Emission Trends
(Between 1970 and 2000)
U.S. Gross Domestic
Product Increased 158%
Vehicle Miles Traveled
Increased 143%
Energy Consumption
Increased 45%
U.S. Population
Increased 36%
Aggregate Emissions
Decreased 29%
(Six Principal Pollutants)
1970
1980
1990
2000
innovative approaches. During the same time period,
U.S. Gross Domestic Product increased by 158 percent,
energy consumption increased by 45 percent, and
vehicle miles traveled increased by 143 percent. The
Nation will continue in the future to realize health
benefits from the reductions in ground-level ozone,
particulate matter, and associated pollutants, especially
sulfur dioxide (SO^ achieved through the Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990.
A county-by-county review of changes in the
levels of the six principal pollutants over the past
10 years shows significant decreases in the number
of people exposed to unhealthy levels of air
pollution. During calendar year 2000 all counties
where levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO^ and SO2 were
measured met National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS). The number of people who
live in counties where monitored levels of pollution
exceed the NAAQS for carbon monoxide (CO) and
the 1-hour standard for ozone (O^ has been cut in
half since 1991. The number of people who live in
counties that do not meet the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
is down by a third since 1991.
Concentrations of particulate matter (PM) also
are down since 1991. In counties where pollution
levels are measured, the number of people exposed
to PM levels exceeding the NAAQS for particles 10
micrometers or less in diameter (PM-10) declined by
50 percent compared to 1991. Formidable challenges,
however, still remain in reducing the risk from fine
particulates 2.5 microns or less in diameter (PM-2.5).
Based on initial monitoring data collected from 1999
to 2001, many areas across the Southeast, Midwest,
and Mid-Atlantic regions and in California have air
quality that may not meet the PM-2.5 NAAQS, based
on initial monitoring data.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
II-l
-------
CO
PB
N02
03(1-hr)
03(8-hr)
PM-10
PM-2.5*
S02
Any NAAQS
Populations of Counties With Air Quality
Concentrations Above the NAAQS Level
9.7
20.7
4.7
11.5
8.9
34.7
8.3
5.1
21.5
64.6
175
81.5
109.1
1991
2000
40
60 80 100
Millions of People
120
140
* PM-2.5 monitoring network still under development in 2000; data is incomplete and may
increase in subsequent years with fully deployed network. No data available for 1991.
EPA and its partners have been successful in
efforts to reduce emissions of toxic air pollutants
and are on track to meet the objective for reductions
in air toxics. Emissions from area, mobile, and
stationary sources have decreased by 35 percent from
a 1993 baseline of 4.3 million tons. EPA anticipates
that the technology-based Maximum Achievable
Control Technology (MACT) standards, once fully
implemented by states and tribes, will achieve at least
a 50 percent reduction in air toxics emissions and
some 1.5 million tons of toxics will be removed
annually from stationary sources such as factories
and industrial plants. Regulation of motor vehicles
and fuels will further reduce emissions of air toxics
which account for approximately 45 percent of the
toxic emission in urban areas.
EPAs Acid Rain Program has met its strategic
objective under Title IV of the Clean Air Act
Amendments for nitrogen oxide (NOx) emission
reductions and is on track to achieve the 2010
strategic objective for SO2 emission reductions. The
program reduced average sulfate deposition between
1996 and 2000 by 10 percent from 1990-1994 levels
nationwide and by 15 percent in the eastern United
States. However, average nitrate deposition increased
by three percent nationwide over the same time
period. As part of the President's National Energy
Policy, EPA worked to develop multi-emissions
reductions proposals that will further reduce NOx
and other emissions from electric utilities.
FY 2001 PERFORMANCE
In FY 2001 EPAs Clean Air programs continued
to: (1) provide direct support to states, tribes, and local
agencies to carry out their Clean Air Act
responsibilities; (2) develop the technical tools and
information needed by states, tribes, and local agencies;
and (3) develop and implement EPA standards and
regulations, market-based and voluntary programs,
and other innovative approaches.
Six Principal Pollutants
In FY 2001, 20 additional areas, with a total
population of 4.5 million people, achieved the NAAQS
for 1 of the 6 principal pollutants. This achievement is
the result of sustained improvements in air quality
and the fulfillment of other Clean Air Act
requirements. Currently 46 percent of the people
who live in counties where air quality is measured
breathe air that meets the standards for all 6 principal
pollutants.
For each of the six pollutants, EPA tracks trends
in two factors: (1) measured pollutant concentrations
in the ambient (outside) air at selected monitoring
sites throughout the country, and (2) estimates of the
total tons of pollutants released into the air each
year. As the chart shows there has been significant
improvement in air quality as measured through each
of the six principal pollutants, as well as their
precursors. A notable exception is NOx emissions,
II-2
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
PERCENT CHANGE IN AIR QUALITY
(20-year vs. 10-year comparison)
Concentrations Emissions
1981-2000 1991-2000 1981-2000 1991-2000
Ozone-1-hr -21 -10 — —
Ozone-8-hr -12 -7 — —
Volatile Organic
Compound — — -32
Participate Matter 10 — -19 -47
Participate Matter 2.5 — — —
Carbon Monoxide -61 -41 -18
Sulphur Dioxide -50 -37 -31
Nitrogen Oxide — — +4
-16
-6
-5
-5
-24
+ 3
Nitrogen Dioxide -14 -11 — —
Lead -93 -50 -94
-4
Data Source: Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS)
• precursor • principal pollutant
which contribute to fine particle pollution, smog,
acid deposition, and eutrophication of surface
waters.
NOx emissions, which are an ozone precursor,
continue to pose a serious threat to achieving clean air
goals. EPA is working with the northeastern states that
are members of the Ozone Transport Commission
to reduce summertime NO emissions through an
X O
allowance trading system, the NOx Budget Program,
which was in its third year of operation in FY 2001.
The Program harnesses market forces to reduce the
cost of pollution control in two phases: the first phase
began on May 1,1999, and the second phase will begin
on May 1, 2003. The program capped summertime
NOx emissions at 219,000 tons in 1999 and will cap
2003 emissions at 143,000 tons. (The 1990 baseline is
472,000.) In FY 2001 participating states emitted
174,100 tons of NOx, which is well below the cap of
219,000 tons.
One of the major highlights of FY 2001 was the
Supreme Court's unanimous decision to uphold the
constitutionality of the Clean Air Act, as EPA had
interpreted it, in setting the more health-protective
NAAQS for ground-level ozone and p articulate
matter. Issues surrounding these standards still need
to be resolved (e.g., Title I requirements, additional
direction from the courts on ozone and 3 years of
data on PM from new monitors.)
Heavy-duty diesel vehicles are responsible for
22 percent of the Nation's particle emissions and
15 percent of its NOx emissions. In FY 2001 EPA
issued far-reaching rules that will result in model year
2007 heavy-duty trucks and buses that are 90 percent
cleaner than today's vehicles. The EPA rules, which
consider diesel fuel and engines together as a single
system, eliminate the equivalent of air pollution from
13 million of today's trucks. The large amounts of
NOx and PM emitted by diesel engines contribute to
or aggravate serious public health problems in the
United States, including lung cancer, respiratory and
cardiovascular disease, asthma, acute respiratory
symptoms, chronic bronchitis, and decreased lung
function. By 2030, the new rules are expected to
prevent more than 8,300 premature deaths, more
than 9,500 hospitalizations, and approximately
1.5 million lost workdays each year.
Also in FY 2001 EPA launched the Voluntary
Diesel Retrofit Program. This program builds
partnerships among industries, community groups,
and state and local officials to retrofit existing older
vehicles to reduce their emissions, thereby resulting
in cleaner, healthier air for communities. Boston,
New York, Houston, Seattle, and Washington, DC,
are active city partners in the program. New Jersey,
California, and Texas are instituting statewide
programs. As of January 2001 state and local
governments and industry participants had
committed to cleaning up 13,500 diesel trucks and
buses, surpassing EPA's original goal of 10,000
vehicles. Retrofitting the diesel engines with emission
control devices will eventually eliminate more than
15,000 tons of PM and NOx from the air each year.
By the end of FY 2001, an additional 55,000
commitments were made to retrofit trucks, buses,
and construction vehicles with commercially available
emission control technologies. More information is
available at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/.
EPA's extensive public outreach efforts included
expanding its Air Quality Index (AQI) web site to
include an AQI Kids' Page, http://www.epa.gov/
airnow/aqikids/aqi.html. The AQI is an integral
part of EPA's ongoing communication with the
public. The AQI reports real-time air quality,
provides forecasts of high pollution days, and
informs the public about associated health concerns.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
II-3
-------
EPA has also partnered with the National Heart,
Lung, and Blood Institute at the National Institutes
of Health to provide information on air pollution to
health care providers through projects associated
with the National Asthma Education and Prevention
Program. In addition, EPA produced an Air Quality
Guide for Particulate Matter, an education and outreach
pamphlet geared to the public that describes adverse
health effects from PM exposure.
Air Toxics
Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is required to set
emissions standards—known as MACT standards—
for categories of major industrial sources emitting
188 listed air toxics. In FY 2001 EPA issued 4 MACT
standards and proposed 13 more that will reduce
toxic emissions from industrial facilities. EPA expects
to propose all but nine of the remaining MACT
standards by 2002. The proposed MACT rule for
electric utilities is expected in December 2003 and
final standards for the others are expected to be
issued by 2004.
In FY 2001 EPA presented results from the draft
National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) to the
public through the NATA web site, http://
www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/. The assessment estimates
exposures to air toxics across the United States and
characterizes potential cancer and noncancer health
effects. When the NATA is complete, the assessment
will incorporate the 32 air toxics that present the
greatest threat to public health. EPA will use the
results to set priorities for the collection of additional
air toxics data, including emissions data and ambient
monitoring data, and to help guide the Agency as it
transitions from setting technology-based emission
standards for major industrial sources to targeting
remaining risks.
Acid Rain
In FY 2001 EPA successfully completed the first
year of Phase II of the Acid Rain Program (http://
www.epa.gov/airmarkets/), during which the SO2
was expanded to include all fossil fuel-fired utility
units serving an electric generator greater than 25
megawatts. Through these efforts the Agency is
making progress toward the goal of reducing SO2
emissions to 8.5 million tons. In addition, more than
1,000 coal-fired utility boilers also were required to
meet an annual NO emission limit.
X
FY 2000 data show that SO2 emissions from
utility sources were 11.2 million tons, representing a
decrease of 6.3 million tons in annual emissions
compared to the 17.5 million tons emitted in 1980.
NOx emissions from coal-fired utility sources were
4.5 million tons in FY 2000, which is more than
2 million tons below projected emissions in the absence
of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.
Although the Acid Rain Program is well on the way
to achieving the overall 2010 strategic objective for SO2
and has already achieved the NOx statutory program
goal, NOx emissions from non-utilities and regulated
electric utilities are growing Unlike SO2 emissions, NOx
emissions from electric utilities are not capped. Rather,
affected sources must meet limits on their emissions
rates. Consequently, as demand for electricity increases
10 2'5
"35
(0 W
p.
Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT)
Issuance and Emission Reductions
I Stationary Source MACT
I Emissions Estimates (tons per fiscal year)
| | Number of MACT Standards Promulgated or Delisted
15
a
•a
(0
10 "5
I
5 i
1990-1995 1996
1997
1998
1999
2000 2001
II-4
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Reductions in SO, and NO, Emissions
20
UJ
17.5
SO2 Emissions
16.3 15.g
Without Title IV
With Title IV
18.7
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
overtime, emissions may also rise. Researchers have
concluded that the reductions in SO2 and NOx resulting
from current Clean Air Act requirements will not be
sufficient to bring about full ecosystem recovery from
the effects of acid rain in sensitive areas of the north-
eastern United States. States have begun work on the
NO State Implementation Plan (SIP) Call which is
designed to mitigate significant transport of NOx, one
of the precursors of ozone across state boundaries in
the eastern United States. The NOx SIP Call requires
selected states and the District of Columbia to revise
their SIPs to include requirements for NO emissions
reductions for selected source categories. Once fully
implemented, these efforts will help offset rising
NOx emissions. As part of the President's National
Energy Policy, EPA will work with Congress to
develop multi-emissions legislation that will further
reduce NO and other emissions from electric utilities.
X
Research Contributions
In FY 2001 EPA completed a year-long PM
monitoring project that will help to establish the
relationship between ambient concentrations of PM
and personal, indoor, and outdoor residential and
community levels and personal exposures. By
reducing uncertainty in this area, EPA will be able to
confirm the appropriateness of the PM NAAQS and
support effective implementation of the NAAQS by
states and tribes. In addition, by better understanding
the ambient concentrations, exposures, and toxicity
of PM, EPA will be better able to estimate the public
health risks from current and future PM exposures,
as well as the benefits of control programs.
To ensure timely consideration and use of the
research results, a key step in the NAAQS decision-
makingprocess is development of the Air Quality
Criteria Document (AQCD), used in the analysis of the
NAAQS. The Second External Review Draft of the
AQCD for p articulate matter was completed and
released for public comment and Clean Air Scientific
Advisory Committee (CASAC) review in July 2001. A
third External Review Draft was requested as a result
of the CASAC review, delaying completion of the
final AQCD until December 2002.
In addition, EPA completed health assessments
for high-priority hazardous air pollutants to aid the
Agency in its assessment of risks posed by toxic air
pollutants and developed source emissions and
control information for both mobile and stationary
sources to guide cost-effective risk management
decisions for atmospheric mercury compounds.
Program Evaluation
Appendix A contains descriptions of program
evaluations completed in FY 2001 that support the
overall Clean Air Goal. No program evaluations
focused specifically on FY 2001 performance.
STATE AND TRIBAL PARTNER
CONTRIBUTIONS
State and Local Partner Contributions
EPA and its partners continue to put in place
flexible, streamlined, and cost-effective tools to reach
the goal of clean air. Although the Clean Air Act is a
federal law, the states have a pivotal role. Controlling
air pollution requires special understanding of local
needs and conditions. State and local agencies
expend considerable effort in the face of rapid
growth in many areas to maintain standards once
they are reached, prevent significant deterioration,
and protect visibility. Through EPA-approved SIPS,
states describe how they will implement clean air
standards. The states involve the public, through
hearings and opportunities to comment, in the
development of each SIP.
EPAs partnerships with states in FY 2001
include the following:
• In March 2001 EPA Administrator Christine Todd
Whitman helped kick off a pilot project in Cleve-
land, Ohio, to cut health risks from toxic air
pollutants. EPA, in cooperation with the city of
Cleveland and the Ohio Environmental Protection
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
II-5
-------
-------
EPA. ITC is cooperatingwith United States and
Canadian partners to characterize air quality in
the binational Sault Ste. Marie area.
ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS OF FY 2001
PERFORMANCE ON FY 2002 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE
FY 2002 Annual Performance Goals (APGs)
under Goal 1 reflect FY 2001 performance. For
example, as EPA missed the FY 2001 target for
ozone, the Agency has adjusted the FY 2002 goal to
reflect the uncertainty states have experienced
because of litigation over the 1997 NAAQS revisions.
As remaining legal issues are resolved, EPA may need
to review both APGs for ozone and PM as well as
the long-term strategic goals. As EPA missed the
combined target for CO, NO2, SO2, and lead in
FY 2001, it increased the target for FY 2002 to reflect
areas that the Agency had hoped to redesignate in
FY 2001 that it now expects to redesignate in FY 2002.
PERFORMANCE DATA CHART
The following performance data chart includes
performance results for the FY 2001 APGs that
support Goal 1. The performance chart reflects the
Agency's 1997 Strategic Plan goals and objectives
with which FY 2001 APGs are associated. Relevant
FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs are included for ease in
comparing performance. Data quality information
for Goal 1 can be found on pages B-l to B-6 of
Appendix B, "Data Quality." Where applicable, the
chart notes cases in which FY 2001 APGs are
supported by National Environmental Performance
Partnership System Core Performance Measures
(NEPPS CPMs). Additionally, the chart provides
results for FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs for which
data were not available when the FY 2000 report was
published, as well as for FY 2000 APGs that are not
associated with FY 2001 APGs.
Summary of FY 2001 Performance
Goal 1: Clean Air
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
FY 1999-FY 2001 Results
By 2010, Improve Air Quality for Americans Living in Areas That Do Not Meet NAAQS
for Ozone and Particulate Matter.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: As remaining legal issues are resolved, EPA may need to review both the annual goals and PM
for ozone and the long-term strategic goals. Air quality has continued to improve over the past 10 years. Almost half of the ozone areas
that were not in attainment with the 1 hour NAAQS in 1990 have been brought into attainment and have approved plans in place to keep
the air clean. The number of people living in monitored counties exceeding the NAAQS has declined by nearly 50% compared to 1991 for
the 1 -hour ozone standard and is one-third less for the 8-hour NAAQS Concentrations of PM-10 are also down almost 20% since 1991.
The number of people exposed to PM-10, in counties where pollution levels are measured, has been more than cut in half compared to 1991.
APG 1 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Maintain healthy air quality for 35.1 million people living in 44 areas attaining the ozone 35.1 M 38.2 M
standard; increase by 1.9 million the number of people living in areas with healthy air 1.9 M 3.5 M
quality that have newly attained the standard; and certify that 5 new areas have 5 3 areas
attained the 1-hour standard for ozone. Goal Not Met. ^-Corresponds with FY 2001 NEPPs
Core Performance Measure (CPM).
33.4 M
FY 2000 Maintain healthy air quality for 33.4 million people living in 43 areas attaining the ozone standard.
Goal Met.
FY 1999 Eight additional areas currently classified as non-attainment will have the 1-hour ozone 10 areas
standard revoked because they meet the old standard. Goal Met.
FY 2001 Result: EPA maintained healthy air for 38.2 million* people living in 43 areas attaining the ozone standard and increased by
3.5 million the number of people living in areas with healthy air quality that newly attained the standard by certifying that three new areas
attained the 1-hour standard. EPA redesignated three of the five areas estimated to come into attainment for the 1-hour ozone standard in
FY 2001 and exceeded its target by nearly 50% for increasing the number of people living in areas with healthy air quality. One area was
redesignated back to nonattainment pending completion of required volatile organic compound (VOC) control measures that were part the
State Implementation Plan requirement.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
II-7
-------
EPA works hand-in-hand with states to determine the pipeline for redesignation requests. From there EPA sets annual targets for areas
to be redesignated, based upon state input. Population estimates are derived from the redesignation estimates. (States may delay
submitting a request for redesignation which in turn impacts the EPA targets. For example, a state may have three years of clean air
data but may defer requesting redesignation because of higher priority air work.) Once a state submits a request, EPA reviews the
request and makes a designation determination. Should a state not submit an expected redesignation request, EPA goes back and
works with the state to get a new estimate of when to expect a redesignation request.
EPA did not meet its redesignation target in 2001 primarily because of the uncertainty among states as they await resolution on
outstanding issues on the transition from the 1-hour to 8-hour ozone standard. To date 41.6 million people live in 46 areas that have been
redesignated to attainment for the ozone standard.
*NOTE: Beginning with FY 2001 results, EPA will use 2000 Census data to report population. Given this, note that the target for
maintaining air quality for 35.1 million was updated to 39.7 million people to reflect 2000 Census data but was offset by one area's being
redesignated to nonattainment, thereby reducing the population number to 38.2 million.
APG2
FY2001
Maintain healthy air quality for 1.276 million people living in 9 areas attaining the
particulate matter (PM) standards; increase by 60,000 the number of people living in
areas with healthy air quality that have newly attained the standard. Goal Met.
FY
Planned
1.276 M
60,000
Actual
1.189 M
2.249 M
FY 2000 Maintain healthy air quality for 1.2 million people living in 7 areas attaining the PM standards, 1.2 M
and increase by 60,000 the number of people living in areas with healthy air quality that have 75,800
attained the standard. Goal Met.
FY 1999 Deploy particulate matter 2.5 ambient monitors including mass, continuous, speciation and
visibility resulting in a total of 1,500 monitoring sites. Goal Met.
1,110
FY 2001 Result: EPA maintained healthy air for 1.189 million* people living in 9 areas attaining the PM standards and increased by
2.249 million the number of people living in areas with healthy air quality that have newly attained the standard. EPA had expected to
redesignate six areas to attainment when in fact it was able to redesignate two additional areas for a total of eight areas. To date
3.4 million people live in 17 areas redesignated to attainment for the PM standard.
*NOTE: Beginning with FY 2001 results, EPA will use 2000 Census data to report population. Given this, note that the target for
maintaining air quality for 1.276 million people is updated to 1.189 million people to reflect 2000 Census data.
APG3
FY2001
Provide new information on the atmospheric concentrations, human exposure, health
effects and mechanisms of toxicity of particulate matter, and facilitate PM National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) review through Air Quality Criteria Document
(AQCD) development and consultation. Goal Not Met.
Performance Measures
- Complete PM longitudinal panel study data collection and report exposure data.
- Report on health effects of concentrated ambient PM in healthy animals and humans,
in asthmatic and elderly humans, and in animal models of asthma and respiratory
infection.
- Final PM AQCD completed.
Planned
Actual
FY2000 Provide new information on the atmospheric concentrations, human exposure, and health
effects of 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. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Hold CASAC Review of draft PM AQCD.
- Longitudinal Panel Study on exposure of susceptible sub-populations to PM.
- PM Monitoring Study Data.
- Baltimore Study on Response of Elderly to PM.
9/30/00
1
9/30/00
1
.S FY 1999 Identify and evaluate at least two plausible biological mechanisms by which PM causes death 2
"5 and disease in humans. Goal Met.
jj
" FY 2001 Result: EPA provided new information on the atmospheric concentrations, human exposure, health effects, and mechanisms to
-H toxicity of particulate matter. The Second External Review Draft of the PM AQCD was completed and released for public comment and
1 Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) review according to schedule in July 2001. However, a Third External Review Draft was
55 requested as a result of the CASAC review, delaying the completion of the final AQCD until December 2002. These modified data also
II-8
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
represent current estimated delays related to activities involving EPA staff and expert consultants regarding the terrorist attack on the
World Trade Center.
By 2010, Reduce Air Toxic Emissions by 75% from 1993 Levels to Significantly Reduce the Risk to Americans of
Cancer and Other Serious Adverse Health Effects Caused by Airborne Toxics.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: EPA is on track to meet its strategic objective. The Agency is making steady progress in
reducing emissions and the associated health risks from air toxics by reducing toxic emissions from industrial sources, reducing
emissions from vehicles and engines through new emission standards and cleaner-burning gasoline, and addressing indoor toxics
pollution through voluntary programs. Looking at the 33 hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) that present the greatest threat to public health
in the largest number of urban areas, a 46% reduction in emissions of those air toxics will occur between the 1990-1993 baseline and
the year 2007. (Currently, half of the air toxic emissions are from mobile sources. Projections indicate that an approximate 40%
reduction in the remaining mobile source emissions can be expected by 2007. This reduction can be attributed primarily to clean fuel
rules issued in recent years that will be implemented in the future.) These reductions do not account for the roughly 150 HAPs beyond
the 33 HAPs. In 2007 and beyond, a much greater percentage of air toxic emissions will be from stationary sources and will need to be
addressed by residual risk initiatives and/or standards and urban area air toxics programs.
APG4
FY 2001
Air toxics emissions nationwide from stationary and mobile sources combined will be
reduced by 5% from 2000 (for a cumulative reduction of 35% from the 1993 level of
4.3 million tons per year.) Data Lag. FY
Planned
5%
Actual
data
available
in 2004
FY 2000 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 the 1993 levels of 4.3 million tons).
Data Lag.
data
available
in 2004
FY 1999 Reduce air toxic emissions by 12% in FY 1999, resulting in cumulative reduction of 25% from
1993 levels. Data Lag.
12%
data
available
in 2002
FY 2001 Result: End of year FY 2001 data will be available in late 2004 to verify that air toxics emissions nationwide from stationary and
mobile sources combined will be reduced by 5% from 2000 emissions (for a cumulative reduction of 35% from the 1993 level of 4.3
million tons).
By 2005, Improve Air Quality for Americans Living in Areas That Do Not Meet the NAAQS for Carbon
Monoxide, Sulfur Dioxide, Lead, and Nitrogen Dioxide.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: The Agency is on track to meet its strategic objective. During calendar year 2000, all counties
where levels of NO2 and SO2 were measured through air monitoring met the NAAQS. The number of people who live in counties where
monitored levels of pollution exceed the NAAQS for CO has been cut in half since 1991. Through 2000 fewer than 2 million people lived in
counties where lead levels exceeded the NAAQS.
APG5
FY2001
Maintain healthy air quality for 31.1 million people living in 56 areas attaining the carbon
monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and lead standards;
increase by 13.2 million the number of people living in areas with healthy air quality that
have newly attained the standard. Goal Not Met. FY
Planned
31.1 M
13.2 M
FY 1999 Certify that 14 of the 58 estimated remaining nonattainment areas have achieved the NAAQS
for carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, or lead. Goal Met.
Actual
36.3 M
0.4 M
FY 2000
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. Goal Met.
27.7 M
3.41 M
13
FY 2001 Result: EPA maintained healthy air for 36.3 million* people living in 56 areas attaining the CO, SO2, NO2, and lead standards and
increased by 418,000 the number of people living in areas with healthy air quality that newly attained the standard. In FY 2001 EPA had
expected to take final action on 12 CO redesignation requests. At the end of FY 2001, EPA had taken final action on 4 and was reviewing
an additional 10. EPA redesignated two areas for SO2 as planned and redesignated three areas for lead.
EPA works hand-in-hand with states to determine the pipeline for redesignation requests. From there EPA sets annual targets for areas to
be redesignated based upon state input. Population estimates are derived from the redesignation estimates. (States may delay submitting
a request for redesignation which in turn impacts the EPA targets. For example a state may have three years of clean air data but may
defer requesting redesignation because of higher priority air work.) Once a state submits a request, EPA reviews the request and makes a
designation determination. Should a state not submit an expected redesignation request, EPA goes back and works with the state to get a
new estimate of when to expect a redesignation request. EPA did not meet its population target of 13.2 million because the areas with
smaller populations were the ones on which final action could be taken.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
II-9
-------
*NOTE: Beginning with FY 2001 results, EPA will use 2000 Census data to report population. Given this, note that the target for
maintaining air quality, 31.1 million people, is updated to 36.3 million people to reflect 2000 Census data.
By 2010, Ambient Sulfates and Total Sulfur Deposition Will Be Reduced by 20-40% From 1980 Levels
Due to Reduced Sulfur Dioxide Emissions From Utilities and Industrial Sources. By 2000, Ambient Nitrates
and Total Nitrogen Deposition Will Be Reduced by 5-10% From 1980 Levels Due
to Reduced Emissions of Nitrogen Oxides From Utilities and Mobile Sources.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: The Agency has met its objective for NOX under the statutory Acid Rain Program and is on
track to meet its statutory goal for SO2. The program sets a permanent cap on the total amount of SO2 that may be emitted by power
plants nationwide at about half of the amount emitted in 1980. For SO2 an emissions trading program gives utilities the flexibility and
incentive to reduce emissions at the lowest cost, while ensuring that the overall emission limit is met.
APG 6
FY 2001
Maintain annual reduction of approximately 5 million tons of SO2 emissions from
utility sources from 1980 baseline. Keep annual emissions below level authorized by
allowance holdings and make progress towards achievement of Year 2010 SO2
emissions cap. Data Lag.
Planned
5 M
Actual
data
available
in late 2002
FY 2000 5 million tons of S02 emissions from utility sources will be reduced from the 1980 baseline. 5M 6.3 M
Goal Met.
FY 1999 Maintain 4 million tons of SO2 emissions reduction from utility sources. Goal Met.
5.04 M
FY 2001 Result: End of year FY 2001 data will be available in
late 2002 to verify that 5 million tons of SO2 emissions from utility
sources were reduced from the 1980 baseline.
FY 2000 Result Available in FY 2001: 6.3 million tons of SO2
emissions from utility sources were reduced from the 1980
baseline.
20
18
16
14
o 12
in
SO, Emissions Covered Under the Acid Rain Program
H Phase I Sources LZl Phase II Sources
I I All Affected Sources, 2000
"5 ' ' "5
1980 1985 1990 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Note: The calculated historical emissions (1980-1990) of utility units affected in the Acid Rain
Program in 2000 are not precisely equal to "official" baseline values of units in the NAPAP (National
Acid Precipitation Assessment Program) inventory.
APG 7
FY 2001
Two million tons of nitrogen oxides (NOX) from coal-fired utility sources will be
reduced from levels that would have been emitted without implementation of Title IV
of the Clean Air Act Amendments. Data Lag.
Planned
2 M
Actual
data
available
in late 2002
FY 2000 2 million tons of NOX emissions from coal-fired utility sources will be reduced from the levels 2M 2 M
before implementation of Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments. Goal Met.
FY 1999 Maintain 300,000 tons of NOX reduction from coal-fired utility sources. Goal Met.
420,000
FY 2001 Result: End of year FY 2001 data will be available in late 2002 to verify that 2 million tons of SO2 emissions from utility sources
were reduced from the 1980 baseline.
FY 2000 Result Available in FY 2001: Two million tons of NOX emissions from coal-fired utility sources were reduced from the levels
before implementation of Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments.
FY 2000 Annual Performance Goals (No Longer Reported for FY 2001)
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). (This annual goal is maintained for
internal reporting.)
11-10
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 2 FY 2001 Obligations
Note:
were $9,007 million
GOAL 2: CLEAN AND SAFE WATER
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.
PROGRESS TOWARD STRATEGIC GOAL AND
OBJECTIVES
EPA has made important strides in focusing its
efforts (as well as those of its state and tribal
partners) on achieving measurable environmental
results. Toward this end the Agency is taking
important steps to translate the activities of EPA,
states, tribes, and regulated entities into measurable
intermediate outcomes, such as the number of
people receiving safe drinking water, the number of
healthy watersheds, and reduced pollutant loadings to
water. EPA made progress in FY 2001 toward its
strategic objectives in the area of clean and safe
water. In coming years the Agency expects to
continue to improve the quality and availability of
data and the management of its programs to achieve
its goals and objectives.
States, tribes, local communities, drinkingwater
systems, and EPA work together to improve the
quality and safety of drinking water in the United
States. In FY 2001 more than 240 million people
(91 percent of people served) received water from
community water systems that reported no violations
of EPAs health-based standards. Water systems
maintained this high level of achievement even in spite
of increasing demand for drinking water from a
growing population.
Despite significant efforts, nearly 40 percent of
the Nation's assessed waters still do not meet water
quality goals established by states under the Clean
Water Act (CWA). According to states, pollution
from nonpoint sources remains the single largest
cause of poor water quality, preventing EPA from
meeting its water quality goals and depriving people
of clean water for economic uses, recreation, and
drinking water. However EPA can report some
progress in this area. In FY 2001 more than 80 percent
of assessed waters in 510 watersheds met all water
quality standards. This is an increase from the 501
watersheds reported in 1998. (Ambient water data are
reported every 2 years.) EPA also published the first-
ever criteria to support state water quality standards
Population Served by Community Water Systems Providing Drinking
Water That Meets All Applicable Health-Based Standards
1UU
c 90
O on
£ 80
CO
i 70
£en
60
o 50
$ 40
5 30
£ 20
10
n
'00
79%
4°
7%
1
1%
91%
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-11
-------
SUMMARY PROFILE: 2000 NATIONAL WATER QUALITY INVENTORY REPORT TO CONGRESS
DRAFT DECEMBER 2001
Waterbody Type
River (miles)
Lakes (acres)
Estuaries (sq. miles)
Coastal Shoreline
(miles)
Great Lakes
Shoreline (miles)
Wetlands (acres)
Total
Size
3,692,830
40,603,722
87,369
58,618
5,521
274,000,000**
Amount
Assessed
(% of Total)
699,946(19%)
17,101,689(42%)
31 ,072 (36%)
3,218(5.5%)
5,066 (92%)
8,227,322
(3%)
Good*
(% of Assessed)
367,129(52%)
8,049,440 (47%)
14,294(46%)
2,518(78%)
0
4,816,227
(59%)
Good but
Threatened*
(% of Assessed)
59,504 (9%)
1,349,173(8%)
1 ,024 (3%)
237 (7%)
1 ,095 (22%)
22,921 (0.3%)
Polluted*
(% of Assessed)
269,258 (38%)
7,702,370 (45%)
15,722(51%)
434(13%)
3,955 (78%)
3,388,174
(41%)
* Includes waterbodies assessed as not attainable for one or more uses.
** From Dahl, I.E., 1990. Wetlands Losses in the United States 1780'sto 1980's. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service.
Note: Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding and because not all states report on summary of use support
for all waters assessed.
for nutrients, which should help states and tribes
develop water quality standards to reduce point and
nonpoint source pollution.
In FY 2001 the Agency continued work on
innovative ways to reduce pollutant discharges
through a focus on key areas such as Concentrated
Animal Feeding Operations and the integration of
local pretreatment and storm water programs.
Innovations such as the use of trading, environmental
management systems, watershed-based approaches,
and increased efficiencies from electronic data
reporting should result in the development of timely,
high-quality permits for a variety of sources and,
ultimately, continued reductions in pollutant loadings.
FY 2001 PERFORMANCE
The first line of defense in protecting public health
from unsafe drinking water—and the most cost-
effective approach—is to prevent pollution at the
source. In FY 2001 more than 2,000 community water
systems serving in excess of 17 million people began to
implement specific source water protection plans
based on completed assessments of the condition
and vulnerability of drinking water sources. States
must complete assessments for all sources of drinking
water by FY 2003. EPA and states also protected
underground sources of drinking water by plugging
almost 3,000 underground injection wells and closing
or issuing permits for more than 11,000 others.
Also during FY 2001 drinking water utilities
completed 469 infrastructure improvement projects
using funds from the Drinking Water State Revolving
Loan Fund (DWSRF). Through the DWSRF states
supported 838 completed projects—over 50 percent
more than the FY 2001 cumulative target of 550—to
help ensure that public water systems maintain their
capacity to meet new and existing standards.
Efforts to protect and improve water resources
require both nationwide and geographically specific
efforts. Total Maximum Daily Loads (TDMLs) are
the centerpiece of national efforts to protect and
enhance ambient water quality, establishing the
analytical basis for decisions on pollution reductions
necessary to meet water quality standards. In
FY 2001, 2,306 TMDLs were developed. Since 1999
states and EPA have more than tripled the number
of TMDLs developed each year. States have identi-
fied 20,000 water bodies in the United States,
11-12 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Types of Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) Projects:
Dollars Loaned from 1997 to 2001
= $2000--
Source
Protection
5.3%
Transmission
and Distribution
31.5%
Planning and
Design Only
0.5%
representing more than 300,000 river and shore miles
and 5 million lake acres, as not meeting water quality
standards for their designated uses.
Coastal counties are growing three times faster
than others, and EPA and its partners help ensure
that these diverse and unique coastal resources can
continue to support healthy populations of wildlife and
perform the economic, environmental, and
aesthetic functions on which coastal populations
depend. Under the National Estuary Program,
70,000 acres of habitat were preserved, restored, or
created in FY 2001, exceeding the target. This
increase comes in addition to the 400,000 acres
protected in past years and represents a significant
step toward helping to reverse the decline in coastal
habitat quality and quantity across the United States.
EPA and its partners also focused attention on
specific water bodies. In FY 2001, more than 400,000
cubic yards of contaminated sediment were remediated
in the Great Lakes, which should result in safer fish to
eat. (Refer to the Goal 6 chapter for more details.)
States along the Gulf of Mexico implemented
watershed restoration strategies in 37 priority impaired
coastal river and estuary segments, far exceeding the
target of 14. In the Chesapeake Bay 711 miles of
stream bank and shoreline were restored with riparian
forest buffers, exceeding the target of 616 miles. The
Bay Program also increased acres of submerged
aquatic vegetation to 69,126, up 81 percent since
1984. These underwater grass beds are a vital habitat
for fish, crabs, and other bay creatures.
Bay Grasses Have Increased Since 1984
Potential Habitat (600,000 acres)
Bay grass beds are
vital habitat
for fish and crabs.
Improved water quality
will promote
Bay grass growth.
Wetlands are also important national resources.
In FY 2001 EPA issued the "Tulloch rule," which
requires a review under the CWA before undertaking
certain activities that destroy wetlands. Prior to the
issuance of this rule, in past years an estimated
20,000 acres of wetlands were ditched and drained
and several hundred miles of streams were
channelized without review or mitigation.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-13
-------
EPA takes a preventive approach to managing
the sources of pollution, using a combination of
effluent guidelines that establish the pollutant discharge
limits for industrial and commercial sources and the
permits that implement these and discharge limits for
other kinds of facilities. Effluent guidelines issued in
FY 2001 will significantly reduce pollutant loadings
in the future. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permits for industrial sources issued
from October 2000 through November 2001
protected water quality by preventing the discharge of
an estimated 6.6 million pounds of toxic pollutants,
786 million pounds of nonconventional pollutants, and
84 million pounds of conventional pollutants into
waters of the United States. EPA also increased the
number of permits issued to reduce discharges of
pathogens and nutrients from urban wet weather
sources of pollution, such as combined sewer
overflows and storm water sources. EPA continues to
make progress toward eliminating the backlog of
NPDES permits that need to be issued or renewed,
but this backlog remains a challenge. Unfortunately
there is no single reason why the rates are not
improving. Factors that affect the Agency's ability to
reduce the permit backlog include permit appeals and
challenges, lack of or redirection of staff and resources
by states, newly adopted water quality standards that
are increasingly comprehensive and more stringent, and
the need to integrate individual permits with watershed
and other planningprocesses. (Refer to Section III,
"Management Accomplishments and Challenges," for
further discussion.)
Clean Water State Revolving Fund
Projects That Initiated Operations
1999
2000 2001
EPA also works to prevent pollution by funding
water quality projects through the Clean Water State
Revolving Fund (CWSRF). These funds enable
communities to provide services such as secondary
wastewater treatment, advanced treatment, combined
sewer overflow correction (treatment), and storm
water treatment. In FY 2001 EPA provided $4 billion
to fund such projects, including $215 million focused
on nonpoint sources and estuaries. During FY 2001,
933 projects were launched, bringing the cumulative
total to 7,452 since the program began in 1988.
Types of Projects Funded by the $34.3 Billion of the Clean Water
State Revolving Funds (through 2001)
Storm Sewer
Overflow
10%
Nonpoint Source
and Estuary
4% / Combined Sewer
Storm Water Overflow
7%
($.5B not allocated)
$35
$30
$25
$20
$15
--$10
--$5
--$0
11-14
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Beach advisories provide an important public
service. In FY 2001 states and localities continue to
increase the amount of information provided
voluntarily about beach conditions. EPA awarded the
first grants to coastal and Great Lakes states and
territories under the new BEACH Act. Through
improvements in the amount and consistency of
information available about the condition of
beaches, these grants will help states and territories
develop improved, consistent monitoring and public
notification programs to accompany the
strengthened water quality standards required by the
Act. Information about 2,200 beaches is available to
the public on EPAs Beach Watch web site at http://
www.epa.gov/ost/beaches/.
FY 2001 also saw an increase in the availability of
fish consumption advisories—23 percent of lake acres
and 9.8 percent of river miles were assessed and placed
under advisory for fish contamination. As in FY 2000
assessments focused on lakes, which is where most
people fish. EPA, together with the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration, also took the significant step of
developing a national advisory on mercury in
commercial and noncommercial fish for women of
childbearing age and children. The advisory was
distributed to the U.S. medical community in
cooperation with the Centers for Disease Control. EPA
also developed, published, and distributed new
translations of the brochure Should I Eat the Fish I
Catch?m Vietnamese, Cambodian, and Korean. (Refer
to the Goal 4 chapter for more about fish
consumption advisories.)
Research Contributions
In FY 2001 EPAs drinking water research
program provided information needed to help assess
and control risks posed by exposure to microbial
contaminants in drinking water. A report on the
occurrence and detection of the unregulated water-
borne pathogen Aervmonasm drinking water will
help EPA evaluate whether it poses a risk to public
health. In addition, a report on the inactivation of
unregulated pathogens by conventional treatment
methods will improve EPAs ability to reduce public
health risks through effective drinking water treat-
ment and risk management of the Nation's water
supplies. EPAs research on aquatic stressors provided
tools and methods for understanding, diagnosing,
and predicting the effects of chemical pollutants on
aquatic ecosystems. The publication of case studies
illustrating the use of EPAs Stressor Identification
Guidelines (Stressorldentification Guidance Document, EPA/
822/B-00/025) will help state and local environmental
resource managers identify causes of biological impair-
ments in aquatic resources using a sound scientific
methodology. Resource managers can also use these
guidelines to respond to CWA requirements, which will
in turn allow the Agency to identify and target for
improvement those water bodies most at risk.
Program Evaluations
In the conference report accompanying EPAs
FY 2001 appropriation bill, Congress directed EPA
to contract with the National Research Council of
the National Academy of Sciences to review the
qualityxof science used to develop TMDLs. Congress
also directed EPA to undertake a comprehensive
analysis of costs associated with the TMDL program.
In July 2001 the NAS report Assessing the TMDL
Approach to Water Quality Management recognized
that there is enough science to "move forward with
decision-making and implementation of the TMDL
program." The report called for changes in the
program to account better for uncertainties, improve
the water quality standards and monitoring programs,
and employ adaptive implementation. One of the
most critical recommendations is for states to
strengthen their monitoring programs. EPA will
consider these recommendations as it revises the
existing program.
Also during FY 2001 EPA completed an internal
evaluation of eight states'watershed management
approaches. The study evaluated the experiences of
selected states that use different models forwatershed
management. It found that statewide watershed
management results in improved cross-agency
coordination, better quality data, increased public
involvement, and more efficient water resource
management. States reported that they are hampered
in implementingwatershed approaches by federal
statutory and EPA programmatic constraints, lack of
state agency accountability and high coordination
transaction costs in developing basin plans, changing
state political and senior management support, and
the complexity of integrating TMDL policies and
process into basin-wide management. EPA is
considering state recommendations to develop a more
o
S.
to
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-15
-------
C
-------
Goal 2 can be found on pages B-6 to B-13 of Appen-
dix B, "Data Quality." The chart notes cases in which
FY 2001 APGs are supported by National Environ-
mental Performance Partnership System Core Perfor-
mance Measures (NEPPS CPMs). Additionally, the
chart presents results for FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs
for which data were not available when the FY 2000
report was published, as well as for FY 2000 APGs
that are not associated with FY 2001 APGs.
Summary of FY 2001 Performance
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
FY 1999-FY 2001 Results
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.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: EPA is on track to achieve this objective by 2005. The Agency has consistently met its drinking
water goals, and the population receiving water that meets all standards continues to increase. EPA does not track consumption of fish
and shellfish, but it continues to work with states, the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control, and others to
improve fish consumption advisories and to increase the amount and quality of information about contaminated fish available to the public.
The Beach Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health (BEACH) Act, signed in October 2000, requires states, territories, and tribes
that have coastal recreational waters and authority for water quality standards to adopt new water quality standards for microbial
contamination. The standards must be in place by April 2004, or EPA will promulgate them. These strengthened standards will reduce
exposure to contamination in recreational waters by 2005.
APGS
FY2001
Planned
Actual
Maintain percent of the population served by water systems that will receive drinking water
meeting all health-based standards that were in effect as of 1994. Goal Met.
^•Corresponds with FY 2001 NEPPS Core Performance Measure (CPM).
Performance Measures
- Population served by community drinking water systems with no violations during
the year of any federally enforceable health-based standards that were in place by 1994.
- Population served by non-community, non-transient drinking water systems with no
violations during the year of any federally enforceable health-based standards that
were in place by 1994.
91%
96%
91%
92%
FY 2000 91% of the population served by community drinking water systems will receive drinking water 91%
meeting all health-based standards that were in effect as of 1994, up from 83% in 1994.
Goal Met.
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.
Goal Met.
91%
FY 2001 Result: Of the universe of Public Water Systems (PWSs), nearly 264 million people were regularly served by Community Water
Systems in 2001; this represents the principal focus of drinking water protection efforts and our chief measure of success. Nevertheless,
the protectiveness of another subset of PWSs, the "non-community non-transient" systems, representing locations with a regular service
population (for example, factories and schools, with independent water supplies), is of national importance as well. The FY 2001 actual
result for non-transient systems was below expectations; this is partly the result of more accurate reporting of non-transient systems'
performance status, reflecting data improvement efforts. To improve performance among this sector, EPA is implementing a strategy to
help small water systems (including the non-community systems) build technical, financial, and managerial capacity they need to meet
health-based standards and better protect human health.
APG9
FY2001
Planned
Reduce exposure to contaminated recreation waters by increasing the information available
to the public and decision-makers. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Beaches for which monitoring and closure data is available at
http://www.epa/gov/OST/beaches/ (cumulative).
2,200
Actual
2,200
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-17
-------
FY 2000 Reduce exposure to contaminated recreational waters by increasing the information available to the
public and decision-makers. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Cumulative number of beaches for which monitoring and closure data is available at "beaches" 1,981
web page
- Number of digitized maps on the web page 150
FY 2001 Result: The BEACH Act, signed into law in October 2000, requires stronger water quality standards for bathing beaches. The law
requires states, tribes, and territories that have coastal recreational waters to adopt new or revised water quality standards for pathogens
and pathogen indicators in accordance with criteria that EPA published in 1986. EPA is required to promulgate standards for states that do
not by April 2004 adopt standards and criteria that are at least as protective as EPA's. States and territories will use funds from BEACH
grants to develop strong, consistent monitoring and public notification programs based on these stronger standards.
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—So
That 75% of Waters Will Support Healthy Aquatic Communities by 2005.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: The number of watersheds with 80% of waters meeting all standards is increasing. At the same
time, EPA is making progress in assessing and analyzing water quality nationwide with an increasing degree of confidence. In FY 1998
states, tribes, and territories reported on the quality of approximately 40% of the Nation's waters. EPA is working to improve state
monitoring programs so states have more timely monitoring information to support their decision-making. The APG below measures
progress toward the revised strategic objective established with a target of 675 watersheds for 2005.
APG 10 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Water quality will improve on a watershed basis such that 550 of the nation's 2,262 550 510
watersheds will have greater than 80 percent of assessed waters meeting all water quality
standards, up from 500 watersheds in 1998. Not
FY 2000 Environmental improvement projects will be under way in 350 high priority watersheds as a result 324
of implementing activities under the Clean Water Action Plan (CWAP). Goal Not Met.
FY 1999 As part of CWAP, all states will be conducting or have completed unified watershed assessments, 56
with support from EPA, to identify aquatic resources in greatest need of restoration or prevention
activities. Goal Met.
FY 2001 Result: This APG reflects the actual quality of water and the extent to which waterbodies support specific uses. Achievement of
this APG is dependent on successful implementation (by states and EPA) of the full suite of CWA actions. This goal represents (admittedly
very broad) a snapshot of water quality at one point in time, so it is an imperfect measure of trends, given inconsistencies in states'
monitoring over time. EPA is working with states to improve water monitoring programs, including better integration of their data. EPA is
also improving the national tracking of progress in restoring watersheds via WATERS, an information system that uses EPA's standard
mapping application to display water quality information about local waters.
APG 11 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Assure that states and tribes have effective, up-to-date water quality standards programs
adopted in accordance with the Water Quality Standards (WQSs) regulation and the WQSs
program priorities. Not Met.
Performance Measures
- Number of states with new or revised WQSs that EPA either approved, or disapproved 30 21
and promulgated replacements
- Cumulative number of tribes with approved WQSs in place 27 19
FY 2000 Assure that states and tribes have effective, up-to-date water quality standards programs adopted
in accordance with the WQSs regulation and WQSs program priorities. Goal Not Met.
Performance Measures
- Number of states with new or revised WQSs that EPA either approved, or disapproved 35
and promulgated replacements.
- Cumulative number of tribes with approved WQSs in place. 18
, FY 2001 Result: Water quality standards established under the Clean Water Act establish specific environmental goals for our nation's
^ waters. Having current, protective water quality standards in place is an essential element of the national water program's water quality
§ protection efforts. Even though EPA did not meet its targets for these actions, states and tribes have done significant work in this area. A
55 number of state standards are complete but waiting for state approval before formal submission to EPA. EPA continues to work with tribes
11-18 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
to clarify national policies for tribes to receive authorization to run the water quality standards program, which will facilitate approval of
new tribal water quality standards. Please refer to Section III, Management Accomplishments and Challenges, for a more detailed
discussion of the strategies to address issues related to WQSs.
APG 12 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Restore and protect estuaries through the implementation of Comprehensive Conservation
and Management Plans (CCMPs). Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Acres of habitat preserved, restored and/or created nationwide as part of the National 50,000 70,000
Estuary Program (cumulative).
FY 2001 Result: 70,000 acres of habitat were preserved, restored and/or created nationwide as part of the National Estuary Program.
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.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: 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. EPA continues to face a
significant challenge in its ability to adequately document actual pollutant loadings reductions. The amount of data available from many
EPA programs is and will continue to be very limited. To help document loadings reductions from permits that implement effluent
guidelines and implement an overall loadings reductions strategy, EPA will take steps to determine the number of facilities in each major
program. This will greatly improve the Agency's ability to successfully model expected reductions and validate these models using the
limited data EPA has. EPA also will continue to improve its ability to measure loadings reductions from its key technical assistance
programs and thereby demonstrate the direct contribution of these programs to the Agency's strategic goals and objectives, as well as the
President's theme of ensuring compliance.
APG 13 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Industrial discharges of pollutants to the nation's waters will be significantly reduced
through implementation of effluent guidelines. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Cumulative reduction in toxic-pollutant loadings by facilities subject to effluent 9.8 M Ib 10.3 M Ib
guidelines promulgated between 1992 and 1999, as predicted by model projections.
- Reduction in loadings for conventional pollutants for facilities subject to effluent 552.7M Ib 557 M Ib
guidelines promulgated between 1992 and 2000, as compared to 1992 levels as
predicted by model projections.
- Reduction in loadings for non-conventional pollutants for facilities subject to effluent 935.6 M Ib 922 M Ib
guidelines promulgated between 1992 and 2000, as compared to 1992 levels as
predicted by model projections.
FY2000 Industrial discharges of pollutants to the nation's waters will be significantly reduced through
implementation of effluent guidelines. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Cumulative reduction in toxic-pollutant loadings by facilities subject to effluent guidelines 4 M Ib
promulgated between 1992-1999, against 1992 levels (predicted by models).
- Cumulative reduction in conventional-pollutant loadings by facilities subject to effluent guide- 473 M Ib
lines promulgated between 1992-1999, against 1992 levels (predicted by models).
- Cumulative reduction in non-conventional-pollutant loadings by facilities subject to effluent 136 M Ib
guidelines promulgated between 1992-1999, against 1992 levels (predicted by models).
FY 2001 Result: Targets were based on model projections of effluent guidelines, having to estimate both the facility universe and the
number of permits developed. Numbers above represent estimated achievements on November 15, 2001, when regions were able to
complete issuance of all permits, including a general oil and gas permit covering 400 facilities in Region 6.
APG 14 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Current national pollutant discharge elimination system (NPDES) permits reduce or
eliminate discharges into the nation's waters of (1) inadequately treated discharges from
municipal and industrial facilities; and (2) pollutants from urban storm water, combined
sewer overflow, and concentrated animal feeding operations. Goal Not
Performance_Measures
- Major point sources are covered by current permits 89% 75%
- Minor point sources are covered by current permits. 66% 75%
www.epa.gov/ocfo Performance Results 11-19
-------
C
-------
Goal 3 FY 2001 Obligations
$95 M
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 FY2001 Total Obligations
were $9,007 million
PROGRESS TOWARD STRATEGIC GOAL AND
OBJECTIVES
EPA is making steady progress toward ensuring
that the foods people eat are safe. Working with state,
local, tribal, and other partners, in FY 2001 EPA
continued to carry out the Agency's three-part
strategy for reducing risks from pesticide residues:
• Reevaluating older, potentially higher risk pesti-
cides using the best current scientific data and
methods to determine what additional limits on a
pesticide's use are needed to provide reasonable
certainty of no harm, especially to children and
other sensitive groups of people.
• Accelerating EPA's review and registration of
alternative pesticides that are less risky than those
currently in use.
• Using partnerships and other means to promote
the adoption and use of lower risk pest manage-
ment methods.
A key element in meeting the Agency's safe food
goal is ensuring the availability of reliable baseline
data against which EPA can measure its progress. In
FY 2001 EPA, Florida State University (FSU), and
the National Pollution Prevention Roundtable began
work to strengthen the data on which performance
indicators and measures supporting EPA's safe food
goal are based. This work builds on EPA's and FSU's
efforts to inventory and describe environmental
outcome indicators and measures, as part of the
Chemical and Pesticides Results Measures (CAPRM)
project (http://www.pepps.fsu.edu/CAPRM),
nationwide for federal agencies, states, tribal entities,
and local government entities.
CAPRM PROJECT:
SAMPLE OF INDICATORS
• Percent of Foods with Detectable Pesticide
Residues
• Percentage of Agricultural Acres Treated with
Pesticides
• U.S. Volume of Pesticide Usage by Type
of Active Ingredient
• Annual Pesticide Use of Select Field Crops by
Pesticide Product Signal Word
FY 2001 PERFORMANCE
Reducing Agricultural Pesticide Risk
Older registered pesticides may cause health
problems, such as birth defects, nerve damage, and
cancer, after long-term exposures to residues in
foods, drinking water, and residential uses. Moreover,
test data from industry applicants indicate that some
pesticides may adversely affect indigenous populations
of birds, fish, mammals, beneficial insects, and other
sensitive species that are not targets for pesticide
applications. Consequently EPA seeks to eliminate or
reduce human health and environmental risks by
encouraging substitution of less risky pesticides for
older chemicals that have potential for these adverse
effects. Specifically during FY 2001 EPA took the
following actions:
• The Agency registered 11 additional reduced-risk
chemical pesticides and biopesticides, approved
103 additional uses of such lower risk pesticides,
and approved 65 new uses as organophosphate
alternatives. This increased availability of lower risk
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-21
-------
pesticides, combined with public demand for safe
food, encourages pesticide producers and users
to shift to reduced-risk alternatives, thereby
eliminating exposures to pesticides that have
been associated with adverse neurological effects
and cancer. As the use of reduced-risk
alternatives increase, they also might become
more cost-effective.
• Through the new Strategic Agricultural Initia-
tive, EPA collaborated with state agriculture
departments, universities, grower groups, and
other partners and stakeholders on 10 to 15 local
projects to assist growers in making the transition
to reduced-risk pest management strategies. For
example, in Michigan collection of commodity-
specific data on pesticide use on local crops is
helping growers make better informed decisions
about pesticide choices. Partners in Oregon have
been able to reduce synthetic pesticide use by
74 percent and organophosphate use by 66 percent.
The Wisconsin Potato and Vegetable Growers
Association, University of Wisconsin, and World
Wildlife Fund are teaming with the American
Farmland Trust and EPA to continue to demon-
strate integrated pest management (IPM) on
potatoes. The IPM techniques used achieved a 25 to
37 percent reduction in the toxic-load of pesticides
used, as measured through a toxicity-scoring
mechanism that reflects the decreased use of
toxic pesticides.
• EPA registered three new pesticide alternatives to
methyl bromide, a widely used fumigant, and the
search for additional alternatives is ongoing. The
United States accounts for 40 percent of methyl
bromide use worldwide. Under the Clean Air
Act, methyl bromide use is to be phased out by
2005 because of its contribution to depletion of
stratospheric ozone.
Pesticides that EPA considers "safer" (those
registered through the Reduced Risk Initiative and
biopesticides) constituted an estimated 3.6 percent of
all agricultural pesticide acre-treatments in 1998,
increasing to 7.1 percent in 2000—significantly
exceeding the Agency's target of 1 percent. FY 2001
results are expected in the spring of 2002.
Percentage of Agriculture
Acres Treated With Reduced-
Risk Pesticides
100
1998
2000
Source: EPA, Office of Pesticides
Reducing Use on Food of Pesticides Not Meeting
Health Standards
EPA continued its ongoing comprehensive
reviews of pesticides initially registered before
November 1, 1984, to ensure their continued safety.
After a thorough review of the data, the Agency
issues a Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED). In
cases where pesticides do not meet health and
environmental requirements, EPA determines what
changes are needed in allowable uses, including
canceling use or limiting use to certified applicators.
By the end of FY 2001 EPA had reviewed more than
71 percent of the 612 cases required to have a RED.
To further protect the food supply, the FQPA set
stricter safety standards for pesticide residues in or
on food and required EPA to reassess all existing
tolerances by 2006 to ensure they meet the new safety
standard of "reasonable certainty of no harm." By
the end of FY 2001 the Agency had completed
reassessment of 40 percent of these tolerances,
including approximately 34 percent of the organophos-
phates and carcinogens, which are among the pesticides
considered of highest risk. Through these efforts,
EPA expects to meet its objective to substantially
eliminate pesticides that do not meet the FQPA
standard.
11-22 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
FQPA'S ADDED PROTECTIONS
EPA builds in a safety factor when registering a pesticide for use on food and determining how much pesticide
residue can remain on food with a reasonable certainty of no harm. This safety factor allows the Agency to be
even more protective of human health than exposure studies suggest is necessary. However, EPA provides a
higher safety factor in certain instances when assessing tolerance levels for foods routinely eaten by infants and
children.
A cumulative risk assessment, which looks at more than one pesticide, is the process of combining exposure
(the amount of a pesticide to which a person is exposed) and hazard (the health effects a pesticide could cause)
from all substances that share a common mechanism of toxicity. Because people can be exposed to several
pesticides that act the same way in the body at the same time through various foods, drinking water, and uses in
and around the home, school, or recreational areas, assessing the effects of these cumulative exposures allows
EPA to understand the risk of an individual pesticide.
An aggregate risk assessment looks at one specific pesticide. Such assessments include all potential, relevant
routes of exposure—food, drinking water, and residential uses and by ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation.
Routes of exposure refer to how people potentially interact with pesticides in the environment.
EPA took action in FY 2001 to reduce the use of
two organophosphate pesticides, diazinon and
acephate. Organophosphate pesticides are widely
used, older pesticides that are a priority for review
because of their potential risks. Diazinon, for
example, is both potentially neurotoxic to humans
and highly toxic to birds, mammals, water invertebrates,
honeybees, and other beneficial insects. When used
in the home, it can pose a risk to children. EPA's
action will end about 75 percent of the current use
of diazinon and restrict remaining uses. Acephate,
also a neurotoxicant in humans, has risks similar to that
of diazinon for environmental effects. Additionally,
EPA's efforts led to the voluntary cancellation of
benomyl, a carcinogen used on several crops
frequently consumed by children.
Pesticide tolerances are set with an ample margin of
safety to avoid human health risks, including risks to
vulnerable populations. The Food Quality Protection
Act (FQPA) mandates extra protection for infants
and children, and EPA uses an extra tenfold protection
factor for infants and children in setting a pesticide
tolerance (the legal maximum allowable pesticide
residue on a food crop) unless scientific data indicate
that a different factor is warranted. The special
dietary patterns of other vulnerable groups, such as
Native Americans, urban poor persons, and farm
families, are also considered in the risk assessment
and tolerance setting process. In FY 2001 the Agency
continued to update and improve its pesticide toxicity
testing guidelines and other assessment tools to ensure
these populations are adequately protected.
s.
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Progress in Reassessing Pesticide Tolerances as of September 30, 2001
Organophosphates Carbamates Organochlorines Carcinogens
Others
Total
This graph shows the status of EPA's tolerance reassessment program by chemical
class. In total, 3,832 tolerances (39.4 percent of 9,721) have been reassessed.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-23
-------
EPA made other important decisions to address
the risks of pesticides in FY 2001. Because of high
levels of worker and ecological risks, EPA, after
conducting a special review and tolerance reassessment,
entered into a memorandum and letters of agree-
ment with manufacturers to cancel registration of
ethyl parathion, which had been registered as a
restricted-use pesticide. Ethyl parathion is among the
most highly toxic registered pesticides; it is a particularly
potent neurologic toxicant and possible carcinogen in
humans.
The Agency also denied a request for a food
tolerance for Starlink's unique protein in corn
because of its potential to cause an allergic reaction
and adopted a final rule strengthening federal
oversight of plants that are genetically modified to
produce pesticidal chemicals.
During FY 2001 EPA revised three science
policy papers with broad scientific and stakeholder
support detailing how EPA scientists will evaluate
aggregate exposure and risk assessment, evaluate
cumulative risk assessment, and apply the FQPA
safety factor. Broadening stakeholder input led to
increased cooperation from industry and growers in
developing and implementing reduced-risk agricul-
tural practices and brought wider understanding and
acceptance of EPAs regulatory decisions.
The Agency also worked to improve its regulatory
decisionmaking in FY 2001. EPA undertook extensive
collaboration with scientists from other federal
agencies, academia, and the private sector and held
multiple meetings with the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Scientific
Advisory Panel, to address the challenges posed by
the evolving field of biotechnology, as well as the
need for new science policies for risk assessments.
The most recent data indicate that in the United
States an annual average of 15,475 food-borne illness
cases and 14 food-borne illness-related deaths are
reported to the Centers for Disease Control (http://
web.health.gov/healthypeople/Document/
HTML/Volumel/10Food.htm). In FY 2001 EPA
^ worked in partnership with the U.S. Department of
§ Agriculture to expedite the review and conditional
<*5 approval of a product to control the virus responsible
for foot-and-mouth disease in livestock. EPA also
tri
"3 worked with the Food and Drug Administration to
o °
55 register food contact preservatives and sanitizers,
providing new tools for controlling microorganisms
in food production and handling. Additionally, the
Agency encouraged greater public awareness about
the precautions people should take in properly
preparing and handling food.
Research Contributions
Research supporting Goal 3 is enabling EPA to
better identify and characterize groups of people at
highest risk, those which may require special regulatory
consideration and protection. In FY 2001 the Agency
developed tests for identifying pesticides that have
increased toxicity for the young. These tests will help
EPA determine how best to protect children from
harmful pesticide exposure. The Agency also con-
ducted studies to better understand age-dependent
differences in response to various pesticides and the
health effects associated with repeated pesticide
exposure. Additionally, EPA produced an evaluative
report on aggregate exposure to pesticides based on
National Human Exposure Survey (NHEXAS)
studies at three areas along the US.-Mexican border.
By using various forms of data collection in the
NHEXAS studies, EPA will learn how human
exposure to pesticides varies according to location, as
well as how to conduct effective future exposure
assessments. Ultimately, the knowledge gained
through these studies will help the Agency determine
how best to keep the public protected from and
informed of the risks associated with toxic pesticides.
STATE AND TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP
CONTRIBUTIONS
State Contributions
Through grant agreements and with guidance
provided by EPA, states enforce federal and state
pesticide laws, maintain pesticide laboratory opera-
tions, train and certify commercial and private
pesticide applicators, and develop groundwater
pesticide management plans to protect groundwater
from contamination. States play a pivotal role in
ensuring that food-use and other pesticides are
applied according to label instructions and that
applicators of restricted-use pesticides are adequately
trained. States also respond to emergency pest
problems by submitting emergency exemption
applications (more than 500 requests in FY 2001),
11-24 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
each of which the Agency reviews to ensure that it
meets FQPA health-based standards.
In FY 2001 EPA and the states supported
training on pesticide safety for farmworkers and farm
families by partnering with the Association of
Farmworker Opportunity Programs, AmeriCorps,
and 37 community-based organizations in 22 states.
EPA also consulted with the state Association of
American Pesticide Control Officials and shared
information with the State FIFRA Issues Research
and Evaluation Group, a network of state officials
interested in federal/state co-regulation of pesticides.
One of EPAs successful partnerships with states has
been the work-share program with California's
Department of Pesticide Regulation, which conducts
data review for Interregional Research Four (IR-4)
petitions. The Directors of State Agricultural
Experiment Stations organized IR-4 to expedite
federal and state minor use registrations and establish
tolerances for many crop uses. The program helps
minor crop producers (whose crops account for
approximately 40 percent of total agricultural sales
for the United States) obtain tolerances and registra-
tions for pest control products. The program sup-
ports development of test data for registrations and
tolerances and prepares specific instructions for
application to include on pesticide labels.
Tribal Contributions
EPA continues to incorporate the needs of
Native Americans into its risk assessments. For
example, in the reregistration process for lindane,
EPA performed a dietary assessment of Alaskan
indigenous populations, which rely heavily on
subsistence foods that might contain lindane residues.
A variety of organochlorine contaminants, including
lindane, have been found in land, freshwater, and
marine environments as a result of intercontinental
transport in air and ocean currents. Fortunately the
assessment found the levels of exposure to be well
below a level of concern. EPA also collaborates with
the Tribal Pesticide Program Council and other tribal
partners to develop a common approach to chemical
exposures related to tribal subsistence lifestyles. For
example, the Agency initiated discussions for a pilot
in the northwest United States to collect food
consumption and pesticide residue data for use in
dietary risk assessments for groups of people that
subsist on fishing, hunting and gathering. Results
from this pilot are expected in late 2002.
ASSESSMENTS OF IMPACTS OF FY 2001
PERFORMANCE ON FY 2002 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE PLAN
Based on FY 2001 performance results, EPA
modified its FY 2002 performance targets to reflect
the impact of fewer reduced risk pesticide applica-
tions from industry, and the delay, resulting from the
lack of the cumulative risk policy, in the development
of tolerance reassessments of special concern to
children. The Agency, with input from its partners
and stakeholders, continues to invest in developing
more outcome-oriented measures to support the
achievement of its food safety goal.
PERFORMANCE DATA CHART
The following performance data chart includes
performance results for the FY 2001 Annual
Performance Goals (APGs) that support Goal 3.
The performance chart reflects the Agency's 1997
Strategic Plan goals with which FY 2001 APGs are
associated. Relevant FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs are
included for ease in comparing performance. Data
quality information for Goal 3 can be found on
pages B-13 to B-15 of Appendix B, "Data Quality."
Additionally, the chart provides results for FY 2000
and FY 1999 APGs for which data were not available
when the FY 2000 report was published as well as
for FY 2000 APGs that are not associated with
FY 2001 APGs.
UJ
as
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-25
-------
Summary of FY 2001 Performance
Goal 3: Safe Food
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
FY 1999-FY 2001 Results
By 2005, the Risk From Agricultural Use of Pesticides Will Be Reduced by 50% From 1995 Levels.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: Since 1996, the year the FQPA was enacted, EPA has made substantial progress
toward reducing risk from pesticide residues in food. Nearly 100 safer pesticides—those which pose less risk to human health
and the environment than conventional chemical pesticides—have been registered, substantially increasing the tools farmers
have at their disposal to protect human health and the environment while ensuring productive agricultural yields. At the same
time, use of pesticides that have the highest potential to cause cancer and neurotoxic effects has declined by more than 15%
based on survey data. Increasing numbers of safer pesticides on the market and increasing numbers of acre-treatments using
such pesticides are ensuring that EPA is on track to meet its revised objective to reduce public health risk from pesticides in
food from pre-FQPA levels.
APG 16 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Decrease adverse risk from agricultural uses from 1995 levels and assure that new
pesticides that enter the market are safe for humans and the environment. Goal Not Met.
Performance Measures
- Register safer chemicals and biopesticides. 96 92
FY 2000 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.
Goal Met.
6
3,069
1,106
427
458
452
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. No Data.
FY 2001 Result: The registration of new agricultural pesticides and reregistration of older agricultural pesticides for use on food were done
under the strict health-based standard of FQPA: "reasonable certainty of no harm." "Safer" pesticides are those that meet an even stricter
set of criteria. However, EPA did not meet the numerical registration goal for two reasons. First, EPA did not receive enough submissions
from industry that met the criteria of "reduced risk." In an effort to resolve this, the Agency held a workshop to provide registrants with
information on what constitutes a reduced-risk pesticide and the data required to register one. Second, policy and scientific issues
concerning biotechnology (such as concerns over resistance management and potential harm to non-target species) delayed the
registration of some new biopesticides.
EPA is working internally with Florida State University and outside stakeholders, including industry and environmental organizations, to
develop potential measures of risk. Although the Agency will continue to use the registration of safer chemicals as a performance measure
under this goal, EPA also improved the measure of occurrence of residues to more accurately measure decreased risk for 2002 and
beyond.
APG 17
FY2001
Provide timely decisions to the pesticide industry on the registration of active ingredients
for conventional pesticides including tolerance setting, product registrations and inert
ingredients. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- New chemicals registered (cumulative)
- New uses (cumulative)
Planned
51
1,979
actions
Actual
1,896
actions
FY 2001 Result: The Agency registered nine new chemicals, exceeding its target by two. EPA also registered 267 new uses of chemicals,
underperforming the target by 83. It has proven difficult to establish good targets for registration. It is difficult to predict within the
Registration Program the number of requests that will come in from industry in any given time frame or the level of difficulty that the review
11-26
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
of these applications might entail. The targets represent EPA's best estimates. In FY 2001 the targets for new uses were adjusted upward
for new uses by 150, based on prior-year experience, but the targets were overestimated when compared with actual completions.
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.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: EPA is well on the way to meeting the revised objective to, by 2008, substantially eliminate the
use on food of pesticides that do not meet the "reasonable certainty of no harm" standard of the FQPA. Since 1996, 40% of the 9,271
tolerances (legal pesticide residue levels on food) have been reassessed using the new standard. More than 70% of 612 reregistration
eligibility decisions have been completed. In particular, the risk of pesticides used on foods frequently eaten by children is decreasing in
part through work in EPA's tolerance reassessment program.
APG 18 Planned Actual
FY 2001 By the end of 2001 EPA will reassess a cumulative 40% of the 9,721 tolerances required to be 40% 40%
reassessed over ten-years and complete reassessment of a cumulative 46% (or 411) of the 46% 44%
893 tolerances of special concern in protecting the health of children. Goal Mot Met.
FY 2000 EPA will reassess 20% of the existing 9,721 tolerances to ensure that they meet the statutory
standard of "reasonable certainty of no harm." Goal Not Met. 121
FY 1999 Under pesticide reregistration, EPA will reassess 19% (or 1,850) of the existing 9,700 tolerances 1,445
(cumulative 33%) for pesticides food uses to meet the new statutory standards of "reasonable
certainty of no harm." Goal Not Met.
FY 2001 Result: The Agency reassessed 40% (3,664) of tolerances requiring reassessment under FQPA. By the end of 2001, EPA had
reassessed 388 (44%) of the 893 tolerances of special concern to children (22 tolerances less than the target of 411). Because EPA
continued to wrestle with the scientific and policy implications of the cumulative risk policy, the number of tolerances of special concern for
children's health fell slightly short of the target. EPA's revised guidance for applying cumulative risk assessments was published on
January 16, 2002. Therefore the pace of reassessments for tolerances of special concern for children's health should increase. EPA is still
on track to meet the statutory deadline of 66% of tolerances reassessed by August 3, 2002, and 100% by August 2006.
UJ
as
www.epa.gov/ocfo Performance Results 11-27
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
11-28 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 4 FY 2001 Obligations
$299 M
TT\
Note: EPA FY2001 Total Obligations
were $9,007 million
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 ecosystems and promote the health of natural
communities that are integral to the quality of life in this nation.
PROGRESS TOWARD STRATEGIC GOAL AND
OBJECTIVES
EPA made progress in FY 2001 toward attaining
its goal to ensure cleaner and safer environments by
preventing pollution before it occurs and reducing
human and ecosystem risks from pollutants that
cannot be eliminated at their source. EPA's work
under this goal spans seven strategic objectives:
reducing pesticide risks to workers, consumers, and
ecosystems; reducing the incidence of childhood lead
poisoning; screening new and existing chemicals for
potential human and ecological risks; improving
indoor air quality to reduce or eliminate indoor
environmental pollutants in the home and to reduce
asthma incidents; reducing toxic wastes through
pollution prevention; increasing municipal recycling
and decreasing waste toxicity; and assessing environ-
mental conditions on tribal lands.
EPA is on track to meet most of its strategic
objectives under Goal 4. Through numerous projects,
the Agency has taken steps to reduce pesticide risks
to workers, consumers, and ecosystems. The Agency
has supported worker protection by developing
training materials; sponsoring radio public service
announcements, in Spanish, promoting worker
safety; and funding trainers of agricultural workers.
The risk to consumers and ecosystems from
pesticides has been reduced through clearer and
more useful pesticide labels and the Agency's
emphasis on the importance of reading the product
label before use. The Agency is also ensuring that
pesticides pose less risk to groundwater by carefully
managing pesticides that have high leaching and
persistence potential. EPA is now managing 19 out
of 31 such pesticides to protect groundwater.
EPA has had great success in reducing children's
exposure to lead. The number of young children
with high levels of lead in their blood has been
drastically reduced since the early 1990s, prompting
the Agency to set an aggressive new goal in its
revised Strategic Plan to reduce the incidence of
childhood lead poisoning from 900,000 cases in the
early 1990s to 200,000 by 2007.
EPA has helped ensure the safety of chemicals,
making progress toward its strategic objective, by
securing voluntary commitments from more than
450 companies to provide essential risk screening data
for more than 2,100 chemicals currently in use and
being produced in quantities exceeding 1 million
pounds per year. The Agency also initiated a
collaborative program with industry and national
experts to assess the risks of a key set of chemicals to
which children are disproportionately exposed.
EPA has experienced a significant setback in its
work toward its strategic objective to cut nonrecycled
waste generation by 20 percent from 1992 levels by
2005 through source reduction and other measures.
The Agency uses data provided by industry to the
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) to measure progress
toward this objective, targeting annual reductions of 2
percent (http://www.epa.gov/tri/). According to
the most recent TRI data (covering 1999), there has
been a 684 million pound (7.2 percent) increase in
the generation of nonrecycled wastes (TRI
pollutants) from 1998 amounts. EPA will not have
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-29
-------
FY 2001 data until spring 2003 because of reporting
and data processing schedules.
The Agency attributes much of this increase to
the surge in production that occurred throughout the
American economy in the late 1990s. When the TRI
data are normalized to control for changes in
production, the increase from 1998 to 1999 becomes
much smaller (191 million pounds or 2.7 percent).
Non-Recycled Waste Trend: FY 1992-1999
11 •
Actual
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
Fiscal Year
Nonetheless nonrecycled wastes increased causing
the Agency to fail to achieve one of its most
prominent annual performance goals and placing
achievement of the strategic objective at risk. The
Agency's revised Strategic Plan contains an additional
target calling for a production-adjusted (normalized)
reduction of 30 percent from 1998 amounts.
Controlling for production change will increase the
visibility of the results being achieved through source
reduction, providing a greater incentive for
companies and governments to expand their efforts
toward this goal.
FY 2001 PERFORMANCE
Risk Identification
Risk identification is the initial stage along a
continuum of risk reduction activities. In FY 2001
EPA exceeded its expectations by securing voluntary
commitments from hundreds of companies to provide
essential risk screening data for more than 2,100
industrial and commercial chemicals, each produced
in quantities exceeding 1 million pounds every year.
Companies that manufacture or import High
Production Volume (HPV) chemicals—those
produced in amounts exceeding 1 million pounds per
year—were invited to sponsor chemicals by voluntarily
pledging to make basic hazard information publicly
available by 2005 as part of the HPV Challenge
Program. Company responses exceeded the Agency's
and stakeholders' expectations: 469 companies have
sponsored 2,155 chemicals. Information on 181
chemicals has already been submitted and is now
available on the Chemical Right-to Know web site,
http://www.epa.gov/oppt/chemrtk/.
In June 2001 EPA launched the Voluntary
Children's Chemical Evaluation with commitments
by 34 companies to assess fully the risks of 20
chemicals to which children might be
disproportionately exposed. EPA, other federal
agencies, states, communities, industry, nongovern-
mental organizations, and other nations will use the
data developed through both of these programs in
assessing and reducing the risks of chemicals and
chemical management practices. Almost every risk
assessment performed in recent years has relied on
the EPA data sources that will be vastly expanded
through these efforts.
The Agency has also worked to identify risks
posed by endocrine disrupters—chemicals that may
cause deformities and other health problems in
wildlife and possibly humans. In FY 2001 EPA
completed the architecture of the Endocrine
Disrupter Priority Setting Data Base, which will help
to set priorities for screening from the current
Current Hazard Data Availability
for U.S. High Production Volume Chemicals
Full Data Set
7.0%
Key risk data are missing
for most chemicals in commerce.
11-30 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
inventory of 87,000 pesticides, commercial chemicals,
cosmetic ingredients, food additives, and nutritional
supplements. The Agency will be able to use these
screens to identify likely endocrine disrupters,
thereby allowing the endocrine-disrupting properties
of these chemicals to be verified. To ensure that EPA
is using the best science in this effort, the Agency
established the Endocrine Disrupter Methods
Validation Subcommittee to provide a forum for the
validation and external scientific peer review of
endocrine disrupter screening and testing methods.
To identify risks on tribal lands, in FY 2001 EPA
completed the structure of the Agency's Tribal
Information Management System, a continuously
updated database and geographic information system
that will provide profiles and environmental
assessments for all Indian tribes in the United States
by FY 2005. This system will draw together environ-
mental information on tribes from existing EPA
databases. When complete, this tool will enable tribes
and users to assess environmental conditions in
Indian Country nationally, as well as individually by
tribe.
Risk Reduction and Elimination
Once risks are identified, EPA pursues two
strategies for reducing or eliminating them. The
Agency's first choice is to prevent risks by eliminating
pollution at the source. One example of the Agency's
pollution prevention efforts in FY 2001 was the use
of EPA's Pollution Prevention Assessment Frame-
work tools to train PPG Industries and Eastman
Kodak to identify product alternatives that are
sustainable both economically and environmentally.
Through these tools, industries can identify safer
products and processes early in the research and
development stage, thus reducing product develop-
ment costs and increasing pollution prevention
benefits. Companies that use these tools are eligible
for expedited reviews of their new chemical review
applications, providing them critical and valuable
competitive advantages in bringing new, greener
products to market. As a result of these upfront
reviews, fewer harmful chemicals are used in industrial
processes, so smaller amounts of such chemicals
have the potential to be released into the environment.
When pollution cannot be eliminated at the
source, EPA uses several risk reduction strategies:
education and outreach, partnership and
collaboration, regulation, and international
negotiation. In FY 2001 the Agency continued to
make strides in its campaign to reduce asthma in
children by providing tools for schools to use to
improve air quality. EPA launched an extensive
asthma public service campaign to raise the public's
awareness of the role that indoor environmental
triggers play in the severity and frequency of
children's asthma. Also, the Radon Program's long-
running public awareness campaign continued with
an Emmy Award-winning public service
announcement providing facts about radon that are
not commonly known by the public. The Agency
estimates that the radon program will yield an
estimated 2,500 lives saved from exposure reductions
achieved from 1986 through 2000; of these, an
estimated 350 lives will be saved from exposures
averted in 2000 alone, based on information from
the National Association of Home Builders' survey
and the three largest radon fan manufacturers in the
United States. Statistics for FY 2001 are not yet
available (http://www.epa.gov/iaq/radon).
INDOOR AIR QUALITY TOOLS FOR SCHOOLS
EPA was successful in recruiting schools to adopt
sound "Indoor Air Quality Tools" practices. This
partnership with the American Lung Association
implements school-based asthma management
education through the program "Open Airways for
Schools." In EPA's New York City regional office,
years of work by the Regional Indoor Environments
staff with the New York City Schools culminated in
passage of a resolution by the Chancellor and Board
of Education committing all New York City public
schools to adopt "Tools for Schools" by the 2005-
2006 school year. New York City alone has 1,200
schools and approximately 1.1 million schoolchildren
(http://www.epa.gov/iaq/schools).
EPA achieved a major milestone in its campaign
to reduce the incidence of childhood lead poisoning
by finalizing a rule that defines the locations and
conditions of lead-based paint and specific levels of
lead in dust and soil that should be classified as
"lead-based paint hazards." The rule, the result of 5
years of work in the Agency, will help inspectors and
QfQ
•a
o
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-31
-------
risk assessors assist property owners in deciding how
to address lead problems in homes through actions
that may include lead-based paint abatement, covering
or removing soil, or professional cleaning of lead
dust. This rule will significantly reduce the risk that
lead poses to human health, particularly that of
children. About 27 million homes are projected to
exceed 1 or more of the hazard levels, and the
Agency estimates that approximately 46 million
children will experience reduced exposure to house-
hold lead in paint, dust, and soil over the next 50
years, to the extent that response actions are taken in
homes that exceed the hazard levels. With the
assistance of states and tribes, EPA has trained and
certified thousands of professionals in state-of-the-art
lead paint abatement practices to address household
sources of lead.
Blood Lead Levels of Children Aged 1-5 Years, 1976-1994
»o
n
Sources: NHANESttm
NHANES199
\
1 \
\
[ \\
mm;
9wtdNHANESBI,Phasell
O >15 ug/dL
• >20 ug/dL
>25 ug/dL
V \
X \ \
r \ \ ^ —
^ ^ \ ^^
\ \ \
x v-« -~^_
^^x/X-. ••
^S, — • •
1976-1980
1988-1991
1991-1994
EPA also reduced risks from pesticides to
workers and the environment through the Strategic
Agricultural Initiative program, expanding the use of
safer pesticides and farming techniques in FY 2001.
The Initiative, along with Agency partners in govern-
ment and industry, is responsible in part for the
significant increase in the use of safer pesticides, well
beyond EPAs original targets. Pesticides considered
by the Agency to be "safer" (those registered through
the Reduced Risk Initiative and biopesticides) consti-
tuted an estimated 3.6 percent of all agricultural
pesticide acre-treatments in 1998, increasing to 7.1
percent in 2000. (Refer to Goal 3 for additional data
on safer pesticide acre-treatments in recent years.)
EPA reduced risks pesticides pose to children
through reexamination of insecticide product pack-
aging. In FY 2001 the Agency undertook a systematic
review of residentially used pesticide products to
determine whether these products meet today's
Child-Resistant Packaging requirements. The Agency
identified more than 160 residential pesticide products
that require further action. This ongoing effort is
making pesticide registrants more aware of their
responsibility to protect children.
Protection of agricultural workers has been
significantly enhanced through the reregistration of
pesticides. Older pesticides are required to be
reregistered to ensure that they meet today's safety
standards. Reregistration decisions in FY 2001
improved worker protection through carefully crafted
restrictions on use. For example, to mitigate risks to
workers who reenter treated crop areas, the Agency is
modifying restricted entry intervals for most crops.
EPA addresses chemicals that persist, accumulate
through the food chain, and are toxic to humans or
environmental receptors (called persistent
bioaccumulative toxics, or PBTs) through reduction
and elimination efforts. In FY 2001 the Agency
increased to 25 the number of PBT reduction/
elimination projects that have been initiated since
FY 2000 with EPAs financial support. The Agency
also entered into partnerships with the American
Hospital Association, the American Nurses
Association, and Health Care Without Harm in a
nationwide campaign to reduce the use of mercury
in more than 300 hospitals. Mercury is a PBT that
affects the nervous system, and methyl mercury is a
chemical species that bioaccumulates in fish. Fish
consumption advisories are in effect for mercury in
thousands of lakes and rivers, including much of the
Great Lakes ecosystem. Harmful effects from
mercury include cancer (possible); temporary or
permanent damage to the stomach, large intestine,
brain, lung, and kidneys; permanent harm to unborn
children; and increased blood pressure and heart rate.
Once wastes are produced, it is often possible to
recycle them. Recycled materials are diverted from
landfills and come back through the economy as
useful products. In FY 2001 EPA made significant
progress creating new, voluntary partnerships of
industry with government to recycle problem waste
streams, in particular electronic products and carpets.
11-32 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
These waste streams are of growing concern to local
governments because of increasing quantities,
difficulties in handling, and toxicity (especially for
electronics). Negotiations are under way to establish
voluntary national mechanisms that divert electronics
and carpets from disposal. Data reported in FY 2001
reflect that the 1999 National Municipal Solid Waste
recycling rate increased to 27.8 percent, 2 million
tons more than in 1998.
Research Contributions
FY 2001 research under Goal 4 focused on
developing exposure data, risk assessment
methodologies, and technologies to improve under-
standing of health risks and reduce community
exposures to environmental stressors. EPA researchers
instructed industry and other federal agencies on the
use of Structure-Activity Relationship (SAR) com-
puter technologies for toxicity prediction and model-
ing and carcinogenicity prediction. This technology
associates chemical structure with toxicity, and from
the structure and toxicity of one chemical it can
predict the toxicity of other chemicals that have
similar structural attributes. By implementing SAR in
industry and other federal agencies, collection of
toxicity data will be more complete and consistent
and duplication of research efforts will be reduced.
In the long run SAR technology will identify chemi-
cals that need additional risk minimization controls
when used in industry and will eliminate potentially
toxic chemicals from widespread industrial use, thus
preventing and reducing risk to the environment and
human health.
Program Evaluation
In February 2001 the General Accounting Office
released a report entitled Environmental Protection: EPA
Should Strengthen Its Efforts to Measure and Encourage
Pollution Prevention. The audit reviewed not only the
extent to which companies are employing pollution
prevention (P2) strategies but also the major
incentives and disincentives that affect use of those
strategies. The evaluation found limitations in the
adequacy of available TRI data to determine the
extent to which companies are adopting P2 strategies.
Public availability of the TRI data and the opportunity
for financial return, however, are the major incentives
for businesses to employ P2 strategies; technical
challenges and high costs are disincentives.
In FY 2001 the Certification and Training
Assessment Group (CTAG), a consortium of EPA,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, state, and Cooperative
Extension Service representatives, continued efforts
to implement improvements in and provide future
direction for the pesticide applicator training and
certification program. Also, the assessment of the
related Worker Protection Standard, which protects
agricultural workers from the risk of pesticides,
continued in FY 2001. Two pilot projects on hazard
communication and improved worker training were
established. Recommendations on program improve-
ments in the areas of training, communications,
enforcement, and integration with the certification
and training program are expected early in FY 2003.
STATE AND TRIBAL CONTRIBUTIONS
State Contributions
Unlike EPAs air and water protection work
under Goals 1 and 2, very few of the environmental
programs under Goal 4 are delegated to states and
tribes for implementation and enforcement. A key
exception is states' significant contribution to achieving
EPAs goal to reduce lead poisoning in children. In
FY 2001, 36 states administered their own programs
to train and certify lead-based paint abatement
professionals, contributing at least half of the
workers to the nationwide pool available to
homeowners seeking to safely renovate their homes
and offices.
In FY 2001 numerous states joined EPA in
commissioning a first-time study of the national
economic impact of the recycling and reuse industry.
Achievement of the Agency's national target of a 35
percent recycling rate by 2005 depends in large part
on federal and state government support for markets
for recyclables and encouragement of consumers to
seek out and buy recycled products. The U.S. Recycling
Economic Information Study documented that the
recycling and reuse industries support more than
56,000 recycling establishments, annually grossing
over $236 billion in revenues and employing more
than 1.1 million people with an payroll of $37 billion.
Recycling and reuse industries use market-based
incentives to increase recycling rates, reducing
material flows to limited-capacity landfills and
QfQ
•a
o
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-33
-------
preventing dangerous chemicals contained in these
materials from entering the environment.
States play a major role in pollution prevention
efforts, supported by EPA grant funds. For example,
Environmental Management System workshops were
conducted for metal finishers in northern California,
resulting in a 95 percent reduction in water usage, a
50 percent reduction in hazardous waste generation,
and 15 percent reduction in electricity usage.
Tribal Contributions
In FY 2001 tribes made a number of contributions
to achieving objectives under EPA's pollution preven-
tion goal. Recycling increased among the St. Croix and
Huron Tribes in the Great Lakes Region, resulting in
22.7 tons of diverted waste. Food waste composting
increased among the Fond du Lac and Oneida Tribes,
resulting in 3.8 tons of food waste composted and
related waste disposal cost savings. The Indian
Health Service conducted in-home environmental
management assessments and provided educational
seminars to families with children who have a high
incidence of asthma or respiratory illness. The
Agency in partnership with the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services and the Inter-Tribal
Council of Arizona offered on-site education and
training to health practitioners and tribal leaders to
develop asthma risk reduction programs, prepare
culturally sensitive guidance materials and training
courses to address indoor environment health risks to
American Indians, and promote the Smoke-Free Home
Pledge campaign on designated tribal reservations and
territories. Two tribes began to train and certify lead
paint abatement professionals.
In FY 2001 EPA completed the framework for
the Tribal Baseline Assessment Project and published
environmental profiles for 200 tribes. The Baseline
Assessment project, in one of its first national-level
assessments, discovered that species that are rare or
particularly sensitive to pollution from human
activities are statistically more abundant in Indian
Country than in the Nation as a whole, underscoring
the need for environmental protection activities by
EPA and other agencies because tribal lands in
general bear a disproportionate amount of pollution.
EPA's Indian Environmental General Assistance
Program (GAP) represents the largest single source
of Agency funding for tribal environmental
programs. GAP has increased from the original
$8.5 million in 1994 to more than $52 million for
FY 2001. GAP funds are helping more than 400
tribes and inter-tribal consortia (of the 572 that are
eligible) build environmental programs in Indian
Country.
ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS OF FY 2001
PERFORMANCE ON FY 2002 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE PLAN
Because of the time lag in obtaining results data,
EPA is now able to report past year results for some
programs. In some cases this lag has required the
Agency to revisit planning targets based on faulty
assumptions. For example, EPA set aggressive goals for
retiring and safely disposing of the national stockpiles
of millions of pieces of electronic equipment
containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
establishing annual targets in FY 2001 for 20,000
transformers and 35,000 capacitors. In May 2001,
however, EPA obtained the first national data
compiled from states, showing that the actual numbers
of units retired in past years were only 12,000 and
19,000, respectively. Accordingly the Agency has
revised its FY 2002 performance measures to reflect
substantially lower expectations and is assessing the
need to develop new strategies for achieving its long-
term strategic targets (120,000 and 210,000 units by
2007).
PCB Units Disposed Of, Year End
1996 1997 1998 1999
11-34 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
PERFORMANCE DATA CHART
The following performance data chart includes
performance results for the FY 2001 APGs that
support Goal 4. The performance chart reflects the
Agency's 1997 Strategic Plan goals and objectives
with which FY 2001 APGs are associated. Relevant
FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs are included for ease in
comparing performance. Data quality information
for Goal 4 can be found on pages B-15 to B-17 of
Appendix B, "Data Quality." Additionally, the chart
provides results for FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs for
which data were not available when the FY 2000
report was published, as well as for FY 2000 APGs
that are not associated with FY 2001 APGs.
Summary of FY 2001 Performance
Goal 4: Preventing Pollution and Reducing Risks
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
FY 1999-FY 2001 Results
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.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: Through a wide array of environmental programs, EPA has made significant progress toward
fulfilling and meeting the target for this objective. EPA's Strategic Agricultural Initiative, in which states, academia, and grower groups
develop and implement model agricultural partnership pilot projects, is providing a highly visible platform for environmentally friendly
agricultural projects. (Twelve projects were initiated in FY 2001.) In addition, the Pesticide Environmental Stewardship Program has
approved 109 strategies developed by voluntary partners in both agricultural and nonagricultural settings. EPA also is ensuring that
pesticides pose less risk to the Nation's groundwater through careful management of pesticides with high leaching and persistence
potential. (Nineteen pesticides have been managed to protect groundwater.) EPA can already see the benefit of work it is doing to reduce
the risk of pesticides to human health and the environment: pesticides that the Agency considers "safer" (those registered through the
Reduced Risk Initiative and biopesticides) constituted an estimated 3.6% of all agricultural pesticide acre-treatments in 1998 and
increased to 7.1% in 2000, significantly exceeding the Agency's original target.
By 2005, the Number of Young Children With High Levels of Lead in Their Blood
Will Be Significantly Reduced From the Early 1990's.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: Lead exposure adversely affects the cognitive development and behavior of young children. The
number of children with elevated blood lead levels (> 10 ug/dL) decreased 80% from the late 1970s through the early 1990s. The 1994
reporting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey results estimated more
than 900,000 affected children. More recent data on the number of children with elevated blood lead levels are not yet available, but EPA
believes based on partial results that the number dropped significantly through the 1990s and that this goal will be achieved, prompting
the Agency to set an aggressive new goal in its revised Strategic Plan: lowering childhood lead poisoning incidence by 2007 to fewer than
200,000 children between the ages of 1 and 5. In FY 2001 EPA completed a keystone of the national lead poisoning reduction regulatory
infrastructure, the Lead Hazard Identification Rule.
By 2005, of the Approximately 2,000 Chemicals and 40 Genetically Engineered Microorganisms Expected to
Enter Commerce Each Year, EPA Will Significantly Increase the Introduction by Industry of Safer or "Greener"
Chemicals Which Will Decrease the Need for Regulatory Management by EPA.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: EPA continued to fulfill its statutory responsibility to safeguard the entry of new chemicals into
commerce by screening nearly 1,800 Premanufacture Notices, leading to the introduction into commerce of more than 600 safer or
"greener" chemicals. To ensure the safety of chemicals already in use, EPA secured commitments from 469 companies to voluntarily
provide critical hazard screening information under the Chemical Right-to-Know Act. These companies will provide information on more
than 2,100 chemicals produced in quantities of at least 1 million pounds per year. On separate fronts, the Agency initiated a program to
assess risks of chemicals to which children might be disproportionately exposed and completed key components of its multiyear effort to
identify chemicals that pose threats to human and ecological endocrine systems, leading EPA to believe it is fully on track to meet this
goal.
APG 19
FY2001
EPA is required to review all chemicals and microorganisms before they are manufactured
commercially to determine whether they can be handled and used safely. If EPA determines
that an unreasonable risk might be posed to people or the environment, it can block the
chemical's entry into commerce or establish control measures to ensure the chemical's
safety in the marketplace. The New Chemicals Program serves as a gatekeeper that can
identify those restrictions, up to and including a ban on production, based on review of
industry-provided Premanufacture Notices. EPA reviewed all 1,770 Premanufacture Notices
received during FY 2001. The target of 1,800 is based on the average of previous year
Planned
1,800
Actual
1,770
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-35
-------
submissions by industry. At the end of 2001, 21% of all chemicals in commerce had been
assessed for risks. Goal Met.
FY 2000 Ensure that of the up to 1,800 new chemicals and microorganisms submitted by industry each year, 1,838
those that are introduced in commerce are safe to humans and the environment for their intended
uses. Goal Met.
FY 1999 Ensure that of the approximately 1,800 new chemicals and microorganisms submitted by industry 1,717
each year, those that are introduced in commerce are safe to humans and the environment for their
intended uses. Goal Met.
FY 2001 Result: EPA is required to review all chemicals and microorganisms before they are manufactured commercially to determine
whether they can be handled and used safely. If EPA determines that an unreasonable risk might be posed to people or the environment,
it can block the chemical's entry into commerce or establish control measures to ensure the chemical's safety in the marketplace. The
New Chemicals Program serves as a gatekeeper that can identify those restrictions, up to and including a ban on production, based on
review of industry-provided Premanufacture Notices. EPA reviewed all 1,770 Premanufacture Notices received during FY 2001. The target
of 1,800 is based on the average of previous year submissions by industry. At the end of 2001, 21 % of all chemicals in commerce had
been assessed for risks.
APG 20 Planned Actual
FY 2001 EPA will make publicly available data from test plans submitted by industry or chemicals
already in commerce. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Through chemical testing program, obtain test data for high production volume 800 724
chemicals on master testing list. chemicals chemicals
FY 2001 Result: Companies that manufacture or import HPV chemicals were invited to participate in voluntarily sponsoring
chemicals, pledging to make basic hazard information publicly available by 2005. More than 460 companies have volunteered to provide
EPA with test data for 2,155 chemicals and 187 chemical categories of the 2,800 HPV chemicals. Test plans and robust summaries of
existing data were submitted by industry for over 700 chemicals in 2001. For each test plan that was submitted, EPA made the data
publicly available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/oppt/chemrtk/.
By 2005,15 Million More Americans Will Live or Work in Homes, Schools, or Office Buildings
With Healthier Indoor AirThan in 1994.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: As of FY 2001 a cumulative total of 8.8 million (estimated) Americans were experiencing healthier
indoor air, or 55% of the goal had been attained. With so much progress already accomplished, EPA is confident of meeting this goal.
APG 21 Planned Actual
FY 2001 890,000 additional people will be living in healthier residential indoor environments. 890,000 890,000
Goal Met.
FY 2000 890,000 additional people will be living in healthier residential indoor environments. Goal Met. 1,032,000
FY 1999 700,000 additional people will live in healthier residential indoor environments. Goal Met. 1,322,000
^
.2 FY 2001 Result: Americans spend about 90% of their time indoors, where they are exposed to levels of pollutants that are often higher
so than those outdoors. As a result, indoor air pollution poses high risks to human health, especially to sensitive populations, and has been
•S ranked among the top four environmental risks in relative risk reports prepared by EPA, the Science Advisory Board, and several states.
.§ As a result of EPA's efforts to improve radon-resistant features in homes, decrease the number of children exposed to environmental
oi tobacco smoke, increase the number of people living in radon-mitigated homes, and educate people with asthma about indoor air asthma
"2 triggers, an additional 890,000 people are living in healthier residential indoor environments.
•2 APG 22 Planned Actual
_a
"o FY2001 1,930,000 students, faculty and staff will experience improved indoor air quality in their 1,930,000 1,930,000
-t, schools. Goal Met.
=
1
g FY2000 2,580,000 students, faculty and staff will experience improved indoor air quality in their schools. 2,600,000
^ Goal Met.
f
§ FY 2001 Result: Studies show that half of our Nation's 110,000 schools have problems linked to indoor air. To improve air quality in
55 schools, EPA implements the "Indoor Air Quality Tools for Schools" program to provide low-cost/no-cost guidelines for proper operation
11-36 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
and maintenance of school facilities that will result in a healthier indoor environment for students and staff. As a result of this program in
FY 2001 , an additional 1 .93 million students, faculty, and staff are experiencing improved indoor air quality in their schools. The Nation has
approximately 110,000 schools with an average of 525 students, faculty, and staff occupying them, for a total population of 58 million. See
http://www.epa.gov/iaq/schools/ for more information.
By 2005, Reduce by 25% (From 1992 Level) the Quantity of Toxic Pollutants Released,
Disposed of, Treated, or Combusted for Energy Recovery.
Half of This Reduction Will Be Achieved Through Pollution Prevention Practices.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: The aggregate change in nonrecycled wastes since 1 992 is an increase of 243 million pounds
(2.4%), though when the analysis is normalized to account for changes in production and reporting requirements, the result is a reduction
of 2.794 billion pounds (-28.0%) as of the most recent TRI report (1999). Because the original goal targets include only the actual
reductions (as opposed to the normalized reductions), the Agency is concerned that it might not achieve this goal and is proposing new
strategies and initiatives to reverse the recent increases in this measure. In addition, because wastes have increased, EPA cannot assess
the extent to which waste reductions are resulting from pollution prevention practices. The Agency will begin analyzing the normalized
data, which do show significant waste reductions, in FY 2002 under its revised Strategic Plan, which expands this goal to include a
normalized reduction goal.
APG23
FY2001
FY2000
Planned
The quantity of Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) pollutants released, disposed of, treated or - 200 M
combusted for energy recovery in 2001 (normalized for changes in industrial production)
will be reduced by 200 millions pounds, or 2%, from 2000. Data Lag.
The quantity of 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. Data Lag.
Actual
data
available
in FY 2003
data
available
in FY 2002
FY 1999 The quantity of TRI pollutants released, treated, or combusted for energy recovery will be reduced - 200 M
by 200 million pounds, or 2% from 1998 reporting levels. Goal Not Met
884M
FY 2001 Result: Data for this APG will be available in spring 2003.
FY 1999 Result Available in FY 2001: The TRI tracks the release of toxic chemicals by facilities that manufacture, process, or otherwise
use toxic materials. EPA uses the TRI to measure reduction of nonrecycled waste generated by those manufacturing facilities. Pollution
prevention strategies focus on avoiding creation of wastes by redesigning products, changing processes, substituting raw materials for
less toxic substances, and other techniques. Total releases of toxic chemicals decreased by 15.1 million pounds from 1997 through 1998,
but the 1999 TRI data reflect an increase in production-related wastes concurrent with a surge in production throughout the American
economy. This increase also was accompanied by a continued increase in the use of pollution prevention practices by industry. The 1999
data show a 684-million-pound, or 7.2%, increase in the generation of nonrecycled wastes over 1998 levels. When the TRI data are
normalized to control for changes in the level of industrial production from 1998 to 1999, the increase in nonrecycled waste is calculated
at 191 million pounds, or 2.7%. EPA is responding to this setback in several ways. In its revised Strategic Plan, which took effect in
FY 2002, a second target is added to the strategic objective, calling for a production-adjusted (normalized) reduction of 30% from 1998
levels. Controlling for production change will increase the visibility of the very real results that are being achieved through source
reduction, providing a greater incentive for companies and governments to expand their efforts toward this goal. The TRI can be accessed
at http://www.epa.gov/tri/.
By 2005, EPA and Its Partners Will Increase Recycling and Decrease
the Quantity and Toxicity of Waste Generated.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: The Agency made significant progress in creating new, voluntary industry-government alliances to
recycle problem waste streams, in particular electronic products and carpets. Efforts will continue in this area as EPA works with
stakeholders to establish voluntary national mechanisms to divert electronics and carpets from disposal. The Nation also continued to
make progress toward the annual targets to increase the rate of recycling of municipal solid wastes, as identified below. Accordingly, EPA
believes it is on track to meet this goal.
APG 24 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Divert an additional 1% (for a cumulative total of 30% or 67 million tons) of municipal solid 67 (30%) data
waste from land filling and combustion, and maintain per capita generation of Resource 4.3 Ib available
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) municipal solid waste at 4.3 pounds per day. in 2003
Data Lag.
QfQ
•a
o
FY 2000 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. Data Lag.
data
available
in 2002
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-37
-------
FY 1999 Maintain levels (for a cumulative total of 28% or 62 million tons) of municipal solid waste diverted 62 M 64 M
from land filling and combustion, and maintain per capita generation ofRCRA municipal solid 4.3 Ib 4.6 Ib
waste at 4.3 pounds per day. Goal Met.
FY 2001 Result: Data for this APG will be available in September
2003.
FY 1999 Result Available in FY 2001: Municipal Solid Waste
(MSW)—more commonly known as trash or garbage—consists of
everyday items such as product packaging, grass clippings,
furniture, clothing, bottles, food scraps, newspapers, appliances,
paint, and batteries. In 1999, U.S. residents, businesses, and
institutions produced more than 230 million tons of MSW, which is
approximately 4.6 pounds of waste per person per day, greater
than the 1999 target of 4.3 pounds per person per day. When
originally established, this target was to be based on the 1990 daily
per capita generation rate which EPA then estimated as 4.3
pounds. Subsequent analysis showed the actual 1990 daily per
capita MSW generation rate to be 4.5 pounds. At the level of 4.6 in
1999, EPA is closely approaching the goal of maintaining the 1990
level of per capita generation of RCRA MSW. Several MSW
management practices, such as source reduction, recycling, and
composting, prevent or divert materials from the wastestream.
Currently, in the United States, 28% of MSW is recovered and
recycled (including composting), 15% is burned at combustion
facilities, and the remaining 57% is disposed of in landfills.
Waste Generation Rates From I960 to 1999
Total Waste Generation
(million tons)
So en o en
o o o o
—
Total Waste Generation (Y1)
Per Capita Generation (Y2) ^^0
Zx^j
^™" 3.66
3.25
10
6
4
2
n
Per Capita Generation
(Ib/person/day)
1960 1970
1980
1990
1999
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.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: It is anticipated that environmental profiles for approximately 286 tribes will be completed by the
end of FY 2002. In constructing its profiles, the Agency's American Indian Environmental Office will make appropriate use of existing EPA
databases and will strive to avoid duplication of efforts. By 2005 EPA will assist all federally recognized tribes in assessing the condition of
their environment, help in building the tribes' capacity to implement environmental management programs, and ensure that EPA is
implementing programs in Indian Country where needed to address environmental issues. Accordingly, the Agency believes it is on track
to meet this goal.
APG 25
FY2001
Planned
Actual
Baseline environmental information will be collected by 34% of Tribes (covering 50% of
Indian Country). Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Environmental assessments for Tribes (cumulative).
193 tribes 207 tribes
FY 2000 16% of tribal environmental baseline information will be collected and 12 additional tribes (cumulative 16%
total of 57) will have tribal/EPA environmental agreements or identified environmental priorities. 4
Goal Not Met.
FY 1999 10% of tribal environmental baseline information will be collected and ten additional tribes 10%
(cumulative total of 45) will have tribal/EPA environmental agreements or identified environmental 11
priorities. Goal Met.
FY 2001 Result: Under federal environmental statutes, EPA is responsible for ensuring human health and environmental protection in
Indian Country. A lack of comprehensive environmental data severely affects EPA's ability to properly identify risks to human health and
the environment in Indian Country. Progress toward building tribal and EPA infrastructure and completing a documented baseline
assessment of environmental conditions continues to be a major focus for EPA and tribes. At the end of FY 2001, a cumulative total of 207
tribes had collected baseline environmental information. Environmental assessments of lands will be conducted for 580 tribal entities.
Prior Year Annual Performance Goals Without Corresponding FY 2001 Goals
(Actual Performance Data Available in FY 2000 and Beyond or With Performance Targets Beyond FY 2001)
APG
FY2000
Planned
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.
Actual
target
year is
FY2005
11-38 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
FY 1999 Complete the building of a lead-based paint abatement certification and training in 50 states, to target
ensure significant decreases in children's blood lead levels by 2005 through reduced exposure to year is
lead-based paint. FY 2005
FY 2000 Annual Performance Goals (No Longer Reported for FY 2001)
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.
Provide methods and models to evaluate the impact of environmental stressors on human health and ecological endpoints for use in
guidelines, assessments, and strategies.
QfQ
•a
o
www.epa.gov/ocfo Performance Results 11-39
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
11-40 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 5 FY 2001 Obligations
Note: EPA FY2001 Total Obligations
were $9,007 million
GOAL 5: BETTER WASTE MANAGEMENT AND
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 to the natural
environment. EPA will work to clean up previously polluted
sites, restoring them to uses appropriate for surrounding
communities and respond to and prevent waste-related or
industrial accidents.
PROGRESS TOWARD STRATEGIC GOAL AND
OBJECTIVES
EPA has made significant progress in achieving
the goal of better waste management, restoration of
contaminated sites, and emergency response
preparedness. With the help of federal, state, tribal,
and local partners, the Agency has continued to clean
up sites and ensure that facilities are managed
according to practices that prevent releases to the
environment. The table below illustrates EPA's
progress toward meeting strategic objective targets for
protecting human health and the environment through
performing cleanup operations and ensuring protective
and preventive facility management practices.
Superfund Construction Completions
Brownfield Property Assessments
RCRA Corrective Action Facilities
with Human Exposures Controlled
RCRA Corrective Action Facilities
with Migration of Groundwater
Releases Controlled
LUST Cleanups Initiated
Objective 1 Totals
RCRA Hazardous Waste Management
Facilities and Municipal Solid Waste
Facilities with Approved Controls
Oil Facilities in SPCC Compliance
LIST Facilities in Compliance with
Spill, Overfill, and Corrosion
Protection Requirements
Objective 2 Totals
1997 Initial
FY 2005
Objective Targets
1,200
1,500
2,350
1,735
370,000
more than 375,000
14,000
4,200
264,000
more than 282,000
2000 Revised
FY 2005
Objective Targets a
1,105
1,500
1,630
1,200
370,000
more than 374,000
6,500
7,100
264,000
more than 277,000
Results
through FY 2001
804
2,594b
823
710
379,000
more than 382,000
2,051C
2,345
218,000
more than 222,300
Note: RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; LUST = leaking underground storage tank;
LIST = underground storage tank.
a Objective targets were revised in the FY 2000 revision of the Strategic Plan. Revised targets reflect improvements in records and
more accurate data.
bData reflects accomplishments through June 2001.
c Represents only hazardous waste managment facilities. Data for municipal solid waste facilities are unavailable.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-41
-------
EPA has already met the FY 2005 target for the
first objective by reaching cleanup milestones at more
than 382,000 sites. This success is largely due to
cleanup activities undertaken through the Leaking
Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Program at
379,000 tanks by the end of FY 2001. The Agency has
achieved its FY 2005 target for Brownfields property
assessments: 2,594 properties were assessed from 1995
through June 2001. The RCRA Corrective Action
Program is on target to achieve FY 2005 intermediate
cleanup goals, which indicate that adequately protective
controls are in place at facilities to prevent any
unacceptable human exposures or migration of
contaminated groundwater. Of the 1,714 high-priority
RCRA facilities, more than 48 percent have met the
target for controlling pathways of human exposure
(a total of 823 facilities) and more than 41 percent have
met the target for controlling migration of
contaminated groundwater (a total of 710 facilities).
"Controlling pathways of human exposure" indicates
that there are no unacceptable human exposures to
contamination that can be reasonably expected under
current land and groundwater use conditions.
"Controlling migration of contaminated groundwater"
indicates that the migration of contaminated
groundwater has been stabilized, and that monitoring
will be conducted to confirm that contaminated
groundwater remains within its original area.
By the end of FY 2001 the Superfund Program had
achieved a total of 804 construction completions. A
construction completion is a measure of progress in
Superfund site cleanups and reflects the point at
which a site remedy is in place,
safeguards prevent the spread of
further contamination, and no
further cleanup construction is
required. Although cleanup
construction either is under way or
has been completed at more than
92 percent of Superfund sites, the
number of new construction
completions was fewer than 85 in
FY 2001 for the first time since
1995. The trend is expected to
continue over the next several
years. Several factors account for
the decline in completions, includ-
ing the large size and considerable
complexity of remaining sites.
EPA is on target to achieve its FY 2005 goals for
the second objective, ensuring that facilities are
managed according to practices that prevent releases to
the environment. The RCRA program, working
effectively in partnership with states, tribes, and other
stakeholders, exceeded expectations in issuingpermits
or implementing approved controls at 2,051 facilities
representing 74 percent of the waste management
facility universe by the end of FY 2001.
Through the end of FY 2001,2,345 facilities had
come into compliance with the spill prevention, control,
and countermeasure (SPCC) requirements of the oil
pollution regulations. SPCC compliance targets for
FY 2002 reduced because oil program resources are
being diverted to address a higher demand for Agency
response or oversight of oil spills. Oil spill response
targets have been increased to account for the shift in
resources.
The Agency's performance measures for its UST
Program were recently revised to determine whether
improved UST systems are being properly operated
and maintained to prevent and detect releases. Under
the new standards for the universe of 266,000 UST
facilities, the Agency documented significant opera-
tional compliance with spill, overfill, and corrosion
protection requirements at 82 percent of the facilities
and significant operational compliance with leak
detection requirements at 77 percent of the facilities.
In addition, 1,499,167 substandard tanks had been
permanently closed by the end of FY 2001.
SUPERFUND CLEANUP AND REDEVELOPMENT
In FY 2001 EPA completed construction at the Millcreek Dump Site near
Erie, Pennsylvania. This 120-acre site was previously used for industrial and
municipal waste disposal and was contaminated with polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons, polychlorinated biphenyls, and heavy metals. In addition, 2,000
people were at risk because they worked or lived within 2,500 feet of the site.
EPA worked in partnership with Millcreek Township and companies
responsible for the contamination to excavate, consolidate, and cap
contaminated soil and then return the property for reuse as a golf resort.
The golf course area was seeded in September 2001 and the course is expected
to open in the near future.
11-42 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Approximately one-half of the American people rely
on groundwater for their drinking water, and
contamination from leaking USTs is the single greatest
threat of groundwater contamination in the United
States. As of March 31,2001, more than 417,000 releases
had been reported from UST systems since 1987.
FY 2001 PERFORMANCE
The most significant and visible accomplishment for
EPA's emergency response program in FY 2001 was the
rapid and effective response to the terrorist incidents of
September llth, and subsequent acts of bioterrorism.
EPA employees were on the ground within hours of the
attacks at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon,
monitoring for contamination, assisting with waste
management, advising on cleanup and decontamination,
and providing information to the public. At the World
Trade Center, EPA assumed the lead role for coordina-
tion of the federal hazardous materials response effort.
When outbreaks of anthrax bioterrorism occurred in early
October 2001, EPA response personnel were among the
first at the scene. They led the effort to clean up and
decontaminate six post offices in Florida and four
congressional office buildings in Washington, DC—the
Ford, Longworth, Dirksen, and Hart buildings.
The Agency also made progress in its cleanup
programs. In FY 2001 EPA worked in partnership with
states, tribes, and the regulated community to address
releases at 20,751 sites, including 47 Superfund con-
struction completions, 302 Superfund removal site
cleanups, 468 final site assessment decisions, response to
or monitoring of 527 oil spills, protection against
human exposures at 179 RCRA corrective action sites,
abatement of additional groundwater contamination at
154 RCRA corrective action sites, and clean up of
19,074 leaking USTs. Superfund removal response
actions also cleaned up 2 million cubic yards of solid
hazardous waste and 68,000 gallons of liquid-based
waste. In addition, EPA provided alternative drinking
water supplies to 1,000 people at 6 sites.
An important element of the Superfund Program
is to leverage the Trust Fund resources by seeking the
highest level of participation by private parties. EPA
manages the program to ensure that questions of
liability are settled quickly and that private parties pay
their fair share of cleanup costs. In FY 2001 EPA secured
private party commitments for cleanup and cost recovery
that exceeded $1.7 billion. Of this amount private parties
agreed to conduct more than $1.3 billion in future
cleanup work and to reimburse EPA for more than
$413.5 million in past costs. To ensure that the Agency's
enforcement efforts are both effective and fair, EPA
recognizes that some parties have added very small
amounts of waste to a site (de minims parties), or that
some who added waste to a site are now insolvent or
defunct, commonly referred to as orphan parties. In
those cases EPA may enter into deminimis settlements, or
offer to compensate settling parties for the liability
associated with orphan shares. In FY 2001 the Agency
entered into 15 de minimis settlements with over 1,900
parties. Additionally EPA made 8 offers valued at over
$17.6 million to compensate settling parties for orphan
shares for future response work at eligible sites, and 8
other offers for a total of over $5.2 million in orphan
share compensation during cost recovery negotiations.
Another important element is the federal agency
partnerships that work to carry out cleanups at
federal facilities. EPA has made progress in working
with the Department of Defense, the Department of
Energy, and other federal agencies to achieve 3 Super-
fund construction completions and 28 removal site
cleanups and to sign 4 interagency agreements to
obtain enforceable cleanup commitments.
The Brownfields Program, one of EPA's most
successful public partnerships, addresses cleanup of
abandoned and contaminated properties. Data through
the third quarter of FY 2001 indicated that the pro-
gram leveraged more than $3.73 billion in public and
private investments and helped create more than 17,300
jobs in cleanup, construction, and redevelopment. Since
1995,2,594 properties have been assessed using federal
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-43
-------
funds and 876 properties have been assessed using
leveraged funds. The 46 job training and development
demonstration pilots have trained at least 700 partici-
pants, and more than 75 percent of the graduates have
obtained employment to date.
In FY 2001 EPA's waste management programs
worked in partnership with states and the regulated
community to ensure safe and preventive facility
management practices by issuing permits or approving
controls at 249 hazardous waste management
facilities; attaining compliance with spill prevention
requirements at 593 oil facilities; and achieving
77 percent significant operational compliance with
leak detection requirements and 82 percent significant
operational compliance with spill, overfill, and corrosion
protection requirements at UST facilities. As part of
the federal effort to ensure safe and preventive
management of radiological wastes, EPA worked
with the Department of Energy in providing regulatory
oversight of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant project.
Research Contributions
In FY 2001 the Agency completed several
technical resource documents that will assist
Superfund project managers in evaluating and
selecting cost-effective remediation options for the
cleanup of contaminated sites. EPA also revised the
emergency response and environmental restoration
radiation risk values to include risks to infants, children,
and women. Additionally, the Agency completed an
evaluative report on several groundwater treatment
technologies for insoluble contaminants. This informa-
tion will assist EPA in effectively protectingpeople from
exposure to and ingestion of contaminated water. EPA's
Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE)
Program continued to encourage the commercialization
IP
I
*>
1
THE FORMER JENKINS VALVE SITE,
LOCATED DIRECTLY AT BRIDGEPORT,
CONNECTICUT'S MAIN GATEWAY
Visitors arriving on the city's ferry, in Amtrak and
Metro-North Railroad cars, and in vehicles buzzing
overhead on the Interstate 95 overpass were all sub-
jected to a clear view of the abandoned, run-down
property. Using a portion of the $200,000 grant
provided to Bridgeport as part of EPA's
Brownfields Pilot Initiative, the city had a site evalu-
ation performed on the Jenkins Valve property.
Based on this evaluation, a private development
corporation stepped in and invested $11 million to
clean up and redevelop the site. The city provided
an additional $1 million, and the state added
$2 million more. This long-idle property is now
home to a new 5,500-seat
ballpark. Eventually it will
also include an indoor ice-
skating rink and a museum.
The ballpark project alone
created 361 jobs, 68 of
which are permanent.
11-44
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
of innovative technologies by providing potential users
with high-quality performance and cost data for 13
remediation and characterization technologies. (Refer to
http://www.epa.gov/ORD/SITE for more
information).
In FY 2001 EPA published responses to public
comments on the Hazardous Waste Identification Rule
(HWIR). The HWIR is a risk-based approach that
the regulated community could use to exclude many
low-risk wastes and waste streams from regulatory
control under RCRA Subtitle C while continuing to
protect human health and the environment. Changes
also were proposed to the Multimedia, Multi-pathway,
and Multi-receptor Exposure and Risk Assessment
(3MRA) modeling methodology, which will assist the
Agency in making the final assessment of the levels
below which a waste is not subject to regulation
under RCRA Subtitle C.
Program Evaluation
Several evaluations of Goal 5 programs were
completed in FY2001, including a General Accounting
Office (GAO) review of the UST program. GAO
surveyed 50 states and interviewed EPA staff in
9 regions to determine whether USTs have the
required equipment and are being properly operated
and maintained, reviewed the breadth of EPA and
state inspections and types of enforcement, and
investigated whether upgraded USTs are leaking
(Improved Inspections and Enforcement Would Better Ensure
the Safety of Underground Storage Tanks, GAO/RCED-
01-464, May 4, 2001.) GAO found that 29 percent of
UST systems are out of compliance; most states do
not have sufficient staff, training, or enforcement tools
to adequately monitor UST facilities and ensure
compliance; enforcement frequency is not sufficient;
noncompliant USTs that are inactive still pose a risk to
the environment and need to be addressed; new or
upgraded tanks continue to leak, although the extent of
the remainingproblem is largely unknown; and leak
detection systems are often improperly operated and
even when properly operated cannot guarantee detection
of leaks. (See Appendix A, "Program Evaluations" for
more information.)
In FY 2001 EPA implemented two UST program
initiatives to address many of the vulnerabilities
identified in this audit. The first initiative is designed to
increase operational compliance with UST require-
ments. It has several activities, including setting
compliance goals, increasing enforcement (including
multisite enforcement), and increasing technical
assistance and training. The second initiative is to
evaluate the performance of UST systems to deter-
mine the sources and causes of remaining problems.
EPA will use the results of this evaluation to improve
UST system performance, thus reducing the likeli-
hood of future releases to the environment.
STATE AND TRIBAL PARTNER
CONTRIBUTIONS
The RCRA, UST, Emergency Preparedness, and
Brownfields programs are governed by federal laws
covering the entire country, but almost all of the
issues addressed by these programs are unique to
each state, tribe, or locality. For this reason, states,
tribes, and local communities are the primary
implementers of these programs and work in
partnership with EPA. Even the Superfund Program,
which is implemented nationally by EPA, relies on
strong state, tribal, and local partnerships to ensure
that its mission is achieved in the most effective and
efficient manner.
State and Local Contributions
Counterterrorism planning and preparedness
efforts through the National Response Team and the
Federal Response Plan have established effective
coordination and communication systems and deterred
creation of redundant systems. Additionally, EPAs work
with states, tribes, and communities has resulted in
15 states implementing the risk management plan
program, and establishing partnerships with thousands
of Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs).
Preliminary surveys in EPAs central region show that
47 percent of LEPCs have incorporated counter-
terrorism aspects into their contingency planning.
Superfund has a strong and effective partnership
with states to support Superfund implementation. In
FY 2001 EPA provided more than $75 million to
states for conducting site-specific support functions
and $18 million to support or enhance state program
capabilities.
Each year the Brownfields Program provides
grants to states' Targeted Brownfields Assessments and
Voluntary Cleanup Programs. In FY 2001 the program
provided $32 million to fund Targeted Brownfield
Assessments at more than 875 properties. In addition,
°8
I
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-45
-------
more than $50 million was provided to 47 states for
assistance to Voluntary Cleanup Programs.
States implement cleanup and management pro-
grams for hazardous and solid waste management
facilities and for USTs. In FY 2001 EPA authorized
Hawaii to implement a base program for RCRA,
raising the total of non-federal RCRA base programs
to 50 (48 states, the District of Columbia, and
Guam). States were also key players in implementing
RCRA Corrective Action Program reforms, with
accomplishments in piloting innovative approaches
to cleanups, developing venues to showcase program
success stories, and actively participating in
Brownfields Program activities to further integrate
these two programs. The UST Program initiated 10
"USTfields" pilots, requiring partnerships between
the federal, state, tribal, and local governments and
the private sector in addressing assessments and
cleanups at abandoned or underutilized properties
where redevelopment is complicated by real or
perceived environmental contamination from federally
regulated USTs. The program also solicited proposals
from states and tribes for up to 40 additional UST
fields pilots.
Tribal Contributions
During FY 2001 EPA continued to work with
tribal waste program managers to promote program
development and address the most pressing needs on
tribal lands. EPA provided $775,000 as part of an
interagency grant program totaling $2.8 million for
closing municipal solid waste open dumps in Indian
Country. EPA also provided $500,000 in tribal grants
for RCRA hazardous waste activities and surveyed
more than 175 tribes regarding their RCRA hazard-
ous waste management needs as an initial step in
developing an inventory for tribal lands.
EPA provided more than $5.3 million in grants
to develop or enhance tribal UST and Superfund
programs in FY 2001. The Agency also supported
involvement at Superfund sites for 78 tribes through
27 cooperative agreements.
Throughout FY 2001 the Brownfields Program
awarded 22 assessment pilot grants, 2 Brownfields
job training grants, and 2 Showcase Community
grants to tribes, in addition to providing technical
assistance to tribes applying for Brownfields pilot
grants. In FY 2001 EPA provided $800,000 to tribes
through its Brownfields assessment pilot grants.
EFFECTIVE CORRECTIVE ACTION
PARTNERSHIPS
The Texas Natural Resource Conservation
Commission partnered with EPA and the Air Force
Center for Environmental Excellence to expedite
the completion of RCRA corrective action activities
at 23 Installation Restoration Program sites under
the Texas Voluntary Cleanup Program.
New Jersey successfully used financial resources
available through its Hazardous Discharge Site
Remediation Fund to assess and investigate
contamination at a high-priority facility. Using this
approach, the state was able to leverage resources
from the New Jersey Redevelopment Authority to
conduct additional cleanup work. Consequently, the
facility is being cleaned up and will be made available
for redevelopment.
Other examples of innovative state efforts can be
found at http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/
hazwaste/ca/showcase.htm.
ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS OF FY 2001
PERFORMANCE ON THE FY 2002 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE PLAN
While cleanup construction is either under way or
has been completed at more than 92 percent of
Superfund sites, EPA did not achieve its target for
Superfund construction completions in FY 2001. As
mentioned previously, one of the factors that accounted
for the decline in completions was the large size and
complexity of many sites. Therefore, EPA reduced its
FY 2002 construction completion target and is
reevaluating the potential impacts of constraints and
complexity at remaining Superfund sites.
Finally, EPA is shifting resources in the oil
pollution program to address the high demand for
Agency assistance in responding to or monitoring oil
spills, and is consequently reducing its estimates for
confirming facility compliance with oil spill prevention,
control, and countermeasure requirements.
11-46 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
PERFORMANCE DATA CHART
The following performance data chart includes
performance results for the FY 2001 APGs that
support Goal 5. The performance chart reflects the
Agency's 1997 Strategic Plan goals and objectives
with which FY 2001 APGs are associated. Relevant
FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs are displayed for ease in
comparing performance. Data quality information for
Goal 5 can be found on pages B-17 to B-22 of
Appendix B, "Data Quality." Where applicable, the
chart notes cases in which FY 2001 APGs are sup-
ported by National Environmental Performance
Partnership System Core Performance Measures
(NEPPS CPMs). Additionally, the chart provides
results for FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs for which
data were not available when the FY 2000 report was
published, as well as for FY 2000 APGs that are not
associated with FY 2001 APGs.
Summary of FY 2001 Performance
Goal 5: Better Waste Management
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
FY1999-FY2001 Results
By 2005, EPA and Its Partners Will Reduce or Control the Risks to Human Health and the Environment
at Over 375,000 Contaminated Superfund, RCRA, UST and Brownfield Sites.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: Through FY 2001 EPA and its partners reduced or controlled the risks to human health and the
environment at more than 382,000 contaminated sites. The FY 2005 objective target includes 370,000 leaking underground storage tank
(LUST) cleanups initiated or completed, and through FY 2001 EPA initiated 379,000 LUST cleanups and completed approximately
271,000. In addition, the Agency reduced or controlled the risks to human health and the environment at more than 800 Superfund sites,
more than 700 RCRA high-priority sites, and more than 2,500 Brownfields sites.
APG26
FY 2001
EPA and its partners will complete 75 Superfund cleanups (construction completions) to
achieve the overall goal of 897 construction completions by the end of 2002. Goal Not Met.
Planned
75
Actual
47
FY 2000 EPA and its partners will complete 85 Superfund cleanups (construction completions) to achieve 87
the overall goal of 900 construction completions by the end of 2002. Goal Met.
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). Goal Met.
FY 2001 Result: In FY 2001 EPA completed construction at 47 Superfund sites for a total of 804 sites where the Agency has reduced or
controlled the risks to human health and the environment over the life of the program. The target was not met because of several factors,
including a greater number of large and complex sites. In view of the missed goal, EPA is reducing its FY 2002 construction completion
target and is reevaluating potential impacts of constraints and complexity that exist at remaining Superfund sites. FY 2001 Superfund
accomplishments in Indian Country include 11 site assessments, support to 78 tribes through 27 cooperative agreements, provision of
$3.8 million for capacity building, and tribal leadership or support in responding to 26% of Superfund sites affecting Indian Country.
APG27
FY 2001
Maximize all aspects of potentially responsible party (PRP) participation including having
PRPs initiate work at 70% of the new construction starts at non-Federal Facility Superfund
sites, and emphasize fairness in the settlement process. Goal Not Met.
Performance Measures
- Ensure fairness by making orphan share offers at 100% of all eligible settlement
negotiations for response work.
- Provide finality for small contributors by entering into de minimis settlements and report
the number of settlers.
Planned
70%
100%
18
Actual
67.3%
100%
15
FY 2000 Maximize all aspects of 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. Goal Not Met.
68%
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-47
-------
Performance Measures
- Orphan share offers at eligible work settlement negotiations.
- De minimis settlements.
100%
18
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.
Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Orphan share offers at eligible work settlement negotiations.
- De minimis settlements.
80%
100%
37
FY 2001 Result: In FY 2001 the percentage of remedial construction starts initiated by responsible parties was slightly less than the
target, but the average over the past 3 years is 73%. EPA determines the percentage of remedial construction starts conducted by
responsible parties at non-federal facility Superfund sites because it indicates the percentage of sites where cleanup is achieved using
private party funding as opposed to the Superfund Trust Fund. For the future, the definition of responsible party-led remedial construction
starts has been revised to include those construction starts performed by EPA but having the majority of funding come from special
accounts. Majority is defined to mean that the funding contributed by responsible parties toward the total response cost to the special
account exceeds the amount contributed by the largest non-private entity. To ensure fairness in the settlement process, EPA successfully
made orphan share offers at 100% of work settlement negotiations. Of the 18 sites having small waste contributors that were targeted for
de minimis settlements in FY 2001, 15 de minimis settlements were accomplished. The target was missed because of complex issues
related to three settlements.
APG 28
FY 2001
Ensure trust fund stewardship by getting PRPs to initiate or fund the work when EPA
expends trust fund monies. Address cost recovery at all Superfund sites with a statute of
limitations (SOL) on total past costs equal to or greater than $200,000. Goal Not Met.
Planned
100%
Actual
97.8%
FY 2000 Ensure trust fund stewardship by recovering costs from PRPs when EPA expends trust fund 98.5%
monies. Address cost recovery at all NPL and non-NPL sites with an SOL on total past costs
equal to or greater than $200,000. Goal Not Met.
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 an SOL on total past costs
equal to or greater than $200,000. Goal Met.
99%
FY 2001 Result: Although the goal was not met, there was no loss in dollars recovered. Cost recovery was addressed at 208 National
Priorities List (NPL) and non-NPL sites during FY 2001, of which 89 had total past costs greater than or equal to $200,000 and potential
statute of limitations (SOL) concerns. EPA addressed cost recovery for 87 of the 89 sites and planned to write off costs associated with
the two other SOL cases, but decision documents were not completed before the expiration of the SOL. The documents were finalized
before the end of the fiscal year. EPA's cost recovery activities are important because they preserve the Superfund Trust Fund by
recovering EPA's past costs, making resources available for other Superfund site cleanups. With respect to private parties in FY 2001,
EPA secured cleanup and cost recovery commitments in excess of $1.7 billion (more than $1.45 billion for future cleanup and $355 million
for recovery of past costs).
APG 29
FY 2001
172 (for a cumulative total of 814 or 47%) of high priority RCRA facilities will have human
exposures controlled and 172 (for a cumulative total of 737 or 43%) of high priority RCRA
facilities will have ground water releases controlled. Goal Not Met. ^Corresponds with
two FY
Planned
172
172
Actual
179
154
„ FY 2000 172 (for a cumulative total of 649 or 38%) of high priority RCRA facilities will have human exposure 191
§ controlled and 172 (fora cumulative total of 612 or 36%) of high priority RCRA facilities 168
I will have ground water releases controlled. Goal Met.
FY 1999 83 (for a cumulative total of 238 or 14%) of high priority RCRA facilities will have human exposure 162
controlled and 45 (for a cumulative total of 119 or 7%) will have ground water releases controlled. 188
Goal Met.
11-48 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
RCRA Corrective Action Environmental Indicator Goals by Fiscal Year
100
90
80
! 75 70
flj O
, ^| Groundwater Releases Con trolled-Verified
^| Human Exposures Control led-Verified
^^ Groundwater Releases Con trolled-Planned
I Human Exposures Control led-Planned
FY 2001 Result: EPA and its state partners
exceeded the goal for human exposures
controlled at an additional 179 RCRA high-
priority facilities (for a cumulative total of 823, or
48%) and nearly achieved the goal for
groundwater releases controlled at an additional
154 RCRA high-priority facilities (for a
cumulative total of 710, or 41%). These totals
relate to 1,700 facilities out of 3,500 industrial
facilities subject to RCRA corrective action that
are classified as high-priority because people or
the environment are likely to be at significant
current or future risk. The goal reflects the
Agency's strategy for addressing the worst
facilities first by focusing on near-term actions
that will mitigate actual or imminent human
exposure problems and stop further spread of
contaminants in groundwater. Although the
cumulative total of sites at which groundwater releases have been controlled is slightly less than the FY 2001 target (710 versus 737),
cumulative totals for both controls still exceed 1998 projections for achieving long-term RCRA corrective action goals. As work continues
toward meeting these long-term goals, the need to resolve difficult issues at some of the more complicated facilities in the high-priority
corrective action universe may occur. Thus, EPA may not always achieve the annual targets for each environmental indicator in the APG,
although the Agency still remains on target to achieve the long-term goals.
°
LU 01
4-
-------
APG 32 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Within 18 months after final listing on the NPL, EPA will make a final offer for an interagency
agreement (IAG) that is consistent with Agency policy and guidance at 100% of Federal
facility Superfund sites. Goal Not Met.
Performance Measures
- Percent of Federal facilities for which final offers are made that meet Agency policy 100% 0%
and guidance.
- Percent of Federal facilities with final offers made within 18 months. 100% 0%
FY 2000 Ensure compliance with Federal facility statutes and Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Agreements and ensure completion of current NPL
CERCLA lAGs. Goal Not Met.
Performance Measures
- Complete NPL lAGs. 2
- Begin CERCLA Negotiations. 1
FY 2001 Result: The Department of Defense (DoD) has questioned the inclusion of certain enforceable provisions within interagency
agreements (lAGs), resulting in IAG negotiation and signing delays at several DoD Federal Facility Superfund sites. Without a signed IAG,
EPA has limited authority to compel or hasten cleanup activities.
APG 33 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Provide technical information to support scientifically defensible and cost-effective
decisions for cleanup of complex sites, hard-to-treat wastes, mining, oil spills near for
cleanup of complex shorelines, and Brownfields to reduce risk to human health and the
environment. Goal Not Met.
Performance Measures
- Deliver the Annual Superfund Innovation Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program 1 0
Report to Congress.
FY 2000 Enhance scientifically defensible decisions for site cleanup by providing targeted research and
technical support. Goal Not Met.
Performance Measures
- Report of natural attenuation case studies of methyl-tertiary butyl ether (MTBE). 0
- Deliver the SITE report to Congress. 1/30/01
- Report of key research on methods, models and factors relating to risk evaluation of dermal 12/31/00
route of exposure.
- Review 20 soil contaminants and develop screening levels. 9/30/00
FY 2001 Result: EPA provided technical information to help reduce or control risks from hazardous wastes and for more cost-effective
characterization, risk assessments, and timely cleanup of complex sites. Examples of recent Agency technical products include a report
on monitored natural attenuation in sediments, a report on field demonstrations of chemically enhanced DNAPL extraction technologies,
and a resource document on the bioremediation of oil spills on marine shorelines. These products will assist site managers in reducing the
risks to human health and the environment from hazardous wastes. EPA's SITE report has been prepared and will be delivered to
Congress upon OMB's completion of their review process. In FY 2001, the SITE program evaluated 13 treatment technologies to assist
site managers in making decisions regarding site characterization and technology selections. To learn more about SITE, visit http://
www.epa.gov/ORD/SITE/.
APG 34 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Continue to make formerly contaminated parcels of land available for residential, commercial,
•g and industrial reuse by addressing liability concerns through the issuance of comfort
| letters and Prospective Purchaser Agreements (PPAs). Goal Not Met.
u
&JD
S Performance Measures
•
Evaluate liability concerns-400% of PPA requests addressed up to a maximum of 100% 91.7%
40 requests
S3 FY 2001 Result: In FY 2001 , 22 of 24 requests for Prospective Purchaser Agreements (PPAs) were assessed by EPA. For the two not
§ assessed, draft PPAs were sent to the prospective purchaser for review and comment. However, all issues were not resolved in sufficient
" time to allow finalization of the PPA. The target was not met. Redevelopment of formerly contaminated properties, such as Brownfields,
^ may be complicated by real or perceived environmental contamination. In some cases, EPA and the Department of Justice may provide
"
11-50 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
covenants not to sue to purchasers of formerly contaminated properties through PPAs to address the liability concerns of prospective
purchasers.
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 Respond to All Known Emergencies
to Reduce the Risk to Human Health and the Environment.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: Through FY 2001 EPA and its partners have been assured that more than 222,000 facilities are
being managed according to practices that prevent releases to the environment. The total includes 2,051 RCRA management facilities
with approved controls; 2,345 oil facilities in compliance with spill prevention, control, and countermeasure requirements of the Oil
Pollution Act; and 218,000 underground storage tank facilities in compliance with spill, overfill, and corrosion protection requirements.
Additionally, EPA and its partners are working to increase their capabilities to successfully respond to all known emergencies by FY 2005
to reduce the risk to human health and the environment.
APG 35 Planned Actual
FY 2001 82 additional hazardous waste management facilities will have approved controls in place 68% 74%
to prevent dangerous releases to air, soil, and ground water, for an approximate total of 68%
of 2,750 facilities. Goal Met.
FY 2000 106 more hazardous waste management facilities will have approved controls in place to prevent 67%
dangerous releases to air, soil, and groundwater, for an approximate total of 67% of 2,900 facilities.
Goal Met.
FY 1999 122 hazardous waste management facilities (for a cumulative total of 61% of 3,380 RCRA facilities) 61%
will have permits or other controls in place. Goal Met.
FY 2001 Result: An additional 249 hazardous waste management facilities have permits or other approved controls in place for a
cumulative total of 2,051 or 74% of the facility universe. The approved controls help to prevent dangerous releases to air, soil, and
groundwater from these facilities.
APG 36 Planned Actual
FY 2001 EPA and its state and tribal partners will achieve levels of 70% UST compliance with EPA/State 70%
leak detection requirements; and 93% UST compliance with EPA/State December 22,1998 93%
requirements to upgrade, close or replace substandard tanks. Other.
FY 2001
FY 2000 90% of USTs will be in compliance with EPA/state December 22, 1998 requirements to upgrade, 38%
close or replace substandard tanks. Goal Not Met.
FY 2001 Result: No data will be available for this APG because EPA and its partners now collect data for facilities as opposed to
individual tanks. Current facility-level data show significant operational compliance with spill, overfill, and corrosion protection requirements
at 82% of UST facilities and significant operational compliance with leak detection requirements at 77% of UST facilities. The UST facility
universe is currently projected at 266,000 facilities.
FY 2000 Annual Performance Goals (No Longer Reported for FY 2001)
400 additional facilities will be in compliance with the Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure provisions of the oil pollution
regulations (fora cumulative total of more than 1,500 facilities since 1997).
Enhance scientifically defensible decisions for active management of wastes, including combustion, by providing targeted research and
technical support.
°8
I
www.epa.gov/ocfo Performance Results 11-51
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
11-52 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 6 FY 2001 Obligations
$334 M
Note: EPA FY2001 Total Obligations
were $9,007 million
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.
PROGRESS TOWARD STRATEGIC GOAL AND
OBJECTIVES
EPA is responsible for many important international
functions that protect and preserve the global
environment. Through its domestic, bilateral, and
multilateral efforts in FY 2001 and in past years, EPA
has made significant progress toward its goal of
reducing global and cross-border risks to human
health and the environment.
U.S. border regions are of particular concern to
the Agency. EPA has reduced and mitigated hazards to
some 7.6 million residents through improved
wastewater treatment, waste disposal, and air quality
along the United States/Mexico border; remediated a
total of 1.7 million cubic yards of contaminated
sediments in the Great Lakes region; and prevented
more than 10,000 cubic meters of high- and low-level
liquid radioactive waste from being dumped annually
into the Arctic Ocean on the Alaskan border.
Climate change and depletion of the ozone layer
are both important areas of focus for the Agency.
EPA works to limit stratospheric ozone layer deple-
tion by restricting domestic consumption of class II
hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and by exempting
the production and import of class I chlorofluoro-
carbons (CFCs), both ozone-depleting substances
(ODS). Additionally, EPA is on target to achieve the
strategic objective to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions and slow climate change through
voluntary programs. Since the mid-1990s, these
programs have reduced U.S. GHG emissions by
more than 240 million metric tons of carbon equiva-
lent (MMTCE), while saving families and businesses
an estimated $24 billion on energy bills and preventing
roughly 550,000 tons of smog-forming nitrogen
oxide (NOx) from polluting the air.
EPA is also making progress in other areas of
international concern, such as toxics. EPA reduced
the risk to human health and ecosystems from toxics
by negotiating and signing the Stockholm Conven-
tion on Persistent Organic Pollutants in May 2001. In
addition, EPA helped other countries, localities, and
organizations apply cleaner and more cost-effective
environmental practices through the adoption of
new laws or policies; increased public outreach; and
enhanced environmental planning, analysis, and
enforcement capabilities.
FY 2001 PERFORMANCE
In FY 2001 EPA reduced transboundary threats
to human health and shared ecosystems in North
America, particularly focusing on the Great Lakes,
the Mexican border, and the Arctic Ocean on the
Alaskan border. On the Canadian border, contami-
nated sediments are one of two main sources of Great
Lakes fish and wildlife contamination, impairingmore
than 2,000 miles (20 percent) of shoreline and
contributing to fish consumption advisories through-
out the Great Lakes. According to data reported in
FY 2001, the Agency and its partners removed or
contained more than 400,000 cubic yards of
contaminated sediments in FY 2000, bringing the
4-year cumulative total to 1.7 million cubic yards. The
immediate benefit of contaminated sediment
remediation is that a large amount of toxic pollution
is physically removed from the environment. A short-
term result is a more diverse and less contaminated
community of small organisms at the base of the food
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-53
-------
chain. Over the longer term, water quality will improve
and fish will be less contaminated and safer to eat.
PCB contamination is a significant cause of
Great Lakes fish advisories. Although there have
been major reductions since the 1970s in the levels
of PCBs in Great Lakes fish, levels are still well
beyond the Health Protection Value (HPV) of
0.05 parts per million (ppm) agreed to by the Great
Lakes States—a level at which even the most sensitive
segments of the population, such as pregnant women
and children, can safely eat unlimited amounts offish.
For example, the most recently reported data from
1998 show that mean concentrations of PCBs in
Lake Michigan coho salmon fillets are approximately
0.5 ppm or 10 times above the HPV
To prevent the illegal dumping of radioactive
waste into the Arctic Ocean and Sea of Japan, EPA
completed another successful project in FY 2001, the
Murmansk Initiative. This partnership with Russia
and Norway placed a new radioactive waste facility in
Russia that will prevent more than 10,000 cubic
meters of high- and low-level liquid radioactive waste
annually from being dumped into the Arctic Ocean
and the Sea of Japan, protecting both citizens and
land in Alaska.
In addition to work on the U.S. border, EPA
provides technical assistance to foreign and domestic
governments to address shared global threats. In
FY 2001 EPA assisted 10 strategically selected
developing countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America,
25
and Eastern Europe, helping them
Decreasing PCBs in Great Lakes Top Predator Fish* incorporate climate change mitigation
• Lake trout for all but Lake Erie, which Is walleye measures into their local priorities.
Domestically many of EPAs climate
protection programs have resulted in
substantial savings in energy use and
energy bills that will be realized over the
next decade. In results reported in
FY 2001, actions taken through EPAs
voluntary programs, such as ENERGY
STAR, have saved consumers and
businesses more than $8 billion in energy
costs and substantially reduced energy
consumption (by 74 billion kilowatt-
hours) and carbon dioxide (CO^ and
NOx emissions. EPAs methane programs
reduced methane emissions to well below
1990 levels in FY 2000 and are projected
to maintain emissions below 1990 levels
through 2010 and beyond (http://
www.epa.gov/oar/climate).
Based on data made available in FY 2001, the
Agency's activities have resulted in a reduction of
approximately 60 MMTCE from 1990 projected
levels of FY 2000 GHG emissions. Although total
U.S. GHG emissions rose in FY 2000 to approxi-
mately 1,900 MMTCE, EPA partnerships have
achieved a 20 percent reduction in expected growth
from 1990 levels. Because equipment promoted
through EPAs climate programs often lasts decades
or more, these investments will continue to deliver
environmental and economic benefits through 2010
and beyond. These programs continue to be highly
1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1999 1992
2000
Along the Mexican border, EPA continues its work
with the Border Environment Cooperation Commission
(BECC) and the North American Development Bank
to evaluate environmental needs and facilitate the
construction of infrastructure. Through the end of
FY 2001,43 BECC-certified projects had been built or
were being built in the border area, ultimately serving
about 7.6 million border residents with improved
wastewater treatment, waste disposal, and air quality.
A total of more than 528,000 residents along the
Mexican border will be protected from health risks,
beach pollution, and damaged ecosystems as a result of
imp roved water and wastewater sanitation systems
funded through FY 2001.
11-54 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
cost-effective approaches for delivering environmen-
tal benefits across the country. For every dollar EPA
has spent, these programs have reduced GHG
emissions by more than 1.0 MMTCE (3.67 tons of
CO^ and delivered more than $75 in energy bill
savings (based on a cumulative reduction since 1995).
Another part of the Agency's climate protection
program is in the transportation sector. As part of
the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles
program, EPA demonstrated 80 miles per gallon
(gasoline equivalent) fuel efficiency on a mid-size
research chassis using a state-of-the-art diesel engine
and an EPA-invented, patented, and developed
hybrid drivetrain. To help consumers make choices
that are better for the environment, EPA developed
the on-line Green Vehicle Guide. This web site
(http://www.epa.gov/autoemissions/index.htm)
addresses both fuel economy and criteria pollutant
emissions to help consumers understand the environ-
mental consequences of their new vehicle purchasing
decisions. In addition, Commuter Choice, a voluntary
business-government partnership that promotes
employer-provided commuter benefits, has provided
immediate reductions in both criteria pollutants and
climate change pollutants. The national program was
developed to improve traffic flow and air quality by
encouraging U.S. companies to offer employees
alternatives to driving to work alone. The program
aims to reach 5 percent of all U.S. employees
(approximately 7 million) by 2010, reducing green-
house gases by 6 MMTCE, cutting NOx emissions by
25,000 tons, and saving commuters 715 million gallons
of fuel annually. In FY 2001 alone EPA signed more
than 200 employers covering about 500,000 employees
at 346 workplaces in 19 states. The commuter
reduction programs these employers provide are
estimated to save approximately 50 million gallons of
fuel per year, with air pollution reductions equivalent
to removingup to 100,000 cars from the road annually
(http://www.epa.gov/otaq/transp/comchoic/
ccweb.htm).
EPA has focused much attention on the global
threat of stratospheric ozone depletion. CFCs and
halons are both powerful stratospheric ODS, and the
projected "business as usual" use in developing
countries could swamp reductions and investments
already made in the United States, with serious public
health implications for people across the globe (e.g.,
skin cancer). In FY 2001, through the Multilateral
Fund established under the Montreal Protocol, the
United States provided assistance to 76 countries to
help eliminate the developing countries' production
and use of ODS. Since the fund's inception the
United States has helped fund 3,500 projects and
activities in 124 countries around the world.
Reported consumption of CFCs and halons for all
developing countries was about 235,000 metric tons
at its highest point. EPA estimates that when these
projects are fully implemented, 150,000 metric tons
of these ODS will be eliminated. Domestically in
FY 2001 the United States met its commitment to
reduce methyl bromide production and imports by
50 percent from the 1991 baseline and listed 31 new
alternatives to ODS for use in a variety of applications.
EPA continues to fulfill its mission to protect
human health from a depleted ozone layer through
its SunWise School Program, which educates
children ages 5-12 on the risks associated with
ultraviolet (UV) and sun exposure as a result of a
depleted ozone layer. Learning about sun protection
has an immediate and long-term benefit to the public
because 80 percent of one's lifetime exposure to UV
occurs before age 18. In 2001 SunWise reached an
additional 9,165 students in 180 schools across the
country, a 61 percent increase in program
participation. The program aims to reach 17,000
schools by 2005 (http://www.epa.gov/sunwise).
The United States participates in a number of
treaties and multilateral agreements to address global
threats. In May 2001 the United States signed the
Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic
Pollutants (POPs). Under this Convention, countries
committed to reduce or eliminate the production,
use, or release of the 12 POPs of greatest concern to
the global community, such as DDT, PCBs, and
dioxins, and established a mechanism to add further
chemicals to the Convention in the future. Because
these dangerous chemicals circulate around the
globe, they can cause health problems in the United
States regardless of where they are produced. Ratifi-
cation of the agreement by 92 countries is needed
for it to go into effect, but countries have already
started to eliminate or decrease the use of the 12
chemicals identified. The United States is making
legislative changes to both the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act and the Toxic
Substances Control Act to fulfill its commitments under
the new agreement. EPA's goal is to have the United
«
ON
o
i:
OS
o
BT
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-55
-------
THE "DIRTY DOZEN": POPS RESTRICTED
BY THE STOCKHOLM CONVENTION
Aldrin Mirex
Dieldrin Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
(DDT)
Endrin Hexachlorobenzene
Chlordane Polychlorinatedbiphenyl (PCBs)
Heptachlor Dioxins
Toxaphene Furans
States ratify the agreement by September 2002, the date
of the World Summit on Sustainable Development.
EPA was involved in negotiations for several
other significant treaties and international agreements
in FY 2001. For example, EPA led the negotiations
on the Global Anti-Fouling Treaty, resulting in a
worldwide ban on the application of tributyltin
(TBT) on ships effective January 2003. TBT is
considered one of the most destructive chemicals
ever introduced to the marine environment, and its
ban will protect oceans and marine life in the United
States and abroad. Another significant accomplish-
ment was the landmark Free Trade agreement signed
by the United States and Jordan, the first to include
environmental provisions in the text. In this agree-
ment, the two countries agreed not to lower environ-
mental standards to attract increased trade. In another
accomplishment facilitating international cooperation,
the Globally Harmonized Classification System was
in place at the end of 2001. This is the first system
forclassifyingphysical/chemical, health, and environ-
mental hazards with international agreement.
•I Program Evaluation
2
.g In FY 2001 EPA and Environment Canada, with
input from more than 50 other governmental and
nongovernmental entities, published the State of the
Great Lakes 2001 report (http://www.binational.net
/sogl2001/index.html). The report uses data from
33 separate indicators to assess the health of the lakes,
a total of some 80 indicators have been proposed.
The review concludes that conditions in the Great
Lakes range from "good" for the quality of drinking
water to "poor" for the impacts of invasive species.
About 25 percent of the indicators showed good or
improving conditions, 25 percent showed poor or
deteriorating conditions, and the rest demonstrated
mixed results. Although the review found that there
has been some progress in cleaning up contaminants,
it also identified continuing threats from invasive
species; atmospheric deposition from sources
outside the basin, confounding efforts to eliminate
contaminants; and urban sprawl, threatening high-
quality natural areas, rare species, farmland, and open
space. The report calls invasive species "the greatest
biological threat to Great Lakes Aquatic ecosystems."
As a result of this report and other factors, EPA plans to
enhance its work in invasive species. Participants also
identified areas for increased management attention,
including the need for further indicator development
and testing; establishment of targets; consistent
monitoring or data collection techniques; improved
data quality and information management; and a
commitment to data collection, interpretation, and
reporting on selected indicators.
Research Contributions
As part of the ongoing U.S. Global Change
Research Program's National Assessment process,
EPA published the final Human Health Sector
Assessment, Mid-Atlantic Regional Assessment, and
Great Lakes Regional Assessment reports in
FY 2001. The Gulf Coast Regional Assessment is
expected to be completed in FY 2002. The findings
of these regional and sector assessments will be used
STATE OF
THE GREAT LAKES
2001
' i. 11 i l;.!'-1,; l. •.: I America
11-56 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
to identify the potential consequences of climate
change in the United States. They also will provide
stakeholders and policy makers with information on
the potential risks and opportunities presented by
climate change and suggest options for adapting to
the changes.
Other assessment efforts in FY 2001 included
two stakeholder workshops in the Great Lakes
Region that focused on how climate changes are
affecting the lakes' commercial shipping and fishing,
energy production, municipal water supply, and
recreational boating. The workshops determined that
as a result of climate changes over the past few years,
people in the Great Lakes Region have experienced
what the Regional Assessment report says might be
more common conditions in the future: warmer
temperatures and increased evaporation have caused
water levels to drop, causing serious problems for the
commercial shipping industry and recreational
boaters. Additional workshops are planned to focus
on land ecology, agriculture, and winter recreation.
ENERGY STAR PARTNERSHIPS
ENERGY STAR is an EPA public awareness campaign
initiated in 1992 to promote energy efficiency via
"energy-saving" products and practices to consumers.
Through the ENERGY STAR program, EPA has
developed strong partnerships with organizations that
sponsor regional/local energy efficiency programs
(such as state governments, energy offices,
departments of natural resources, governors' offices
and regulated utilities). Currently 130 such
organizations, serving 50 percent of U.S. households,
are partnering with ENERGY STAR to deliver the
message to their constituents. In FY 2001 State Energy
Offices in Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio,
and Wisconsin established statewide goals for
benchmarking building performance with ENERGY
STAR. In addition, California, New York, and
Wisconsin have moved forward to integrate ENERGY
STAR into their commercial energy efficiency
programs. Currently the national energy performance
rating system is being used by more than 100 school
districts nationwide, which have collectively rated
more than 3,400 school buildings, or approximately
7 percent of the total K—12 floor space.
STATE AND TRIBAL PARTNER CONTRIBUTIONS
EPA has many important and productive part-
nerships with states and tribes. For example, the State
and Local Climate Outreach Partnership Program
works closely with states and cities across the country
to identify cost-effective measures and opportunities
to reduce emissions of GHGs. This year, EPA
facilitated state and local government-led efforts to
inventory local GHG emissions, resulting in an
additional 25 states and 41 cities measuring or
mitigating their GHGs. To date EPA has 41 state
partners and several hundred local partners that have
collectively identified 17 MMTCE of potential cost-
effective reductions and $7.9 billion in energy savings.
In an important tribal partnership, EPA sought,
raised, and incorporated tribal concerns into the
negotiations for the Stockholm Convention on
POPs. Representatives from the Yupik, Inupiat, Inuit,
and Gwich'in Tribes were present as observers at the
Convention signing ceremony in Stockholm, Sweden.
The Arctic Cord Blood Monitoring Program,
developed in response to Alaska Natives' concerns
about the effects of POPs and heavy metals in native
subsistence foods, is a tribal partnership with an
international emphasis. This program monitors the
levels and trends of selected heavy metals and POPs,
including PCBs, in umbilical cord blood and maternal
blood of eight primary indigenous groups along the
coast of Alaska. The initial focus is on the correlation
between POP levels and chronic sickness of new-
borns because studies indicate high levels of POP
contamination in newborns. The study is being
expanded to improve statistics and include a wider
geographic area.
ASSESSMENTS OF IMPACTS OF FY 2001
PERFORMANCE ON THE FY 2002 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE PLAN
EPA is making significant adjustments to its
Great Lakes program based on FY 2001 perfor-
mance. Preliminary FY 2001 data show dissolved
oxygen concentrations in Lake Erie's central basin to
be near the worst observed during the past 5 years.
Despite international success in reducing phosphorus
loadings, phosphorus concentrations (observed
through United States and Canadian monitoring) are
increasing. Reducingphosphorus loads was expected
«
ON
o
i:
OS
o
35'
BT
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-57
-------
to reduce algae production and decomposition
(which removes oxygen from the water) and result in
higher dissolved oxygen concentrations. To help
understand this puzzling challenge, EPA has added a
new program measure for internal management
purposes: limited or no depletion in the long-term
Lake Erie dissolved oxygen trend.
Following the signature of the POPs Convention
and the finalization of the Global Anti-Fouling
Treaty, EPA is defining what legislative and
regulatory actions will be necessary to give full effect
to the agreements. The Agency has established new
FY 2002 performance measures for ratification of
the Global Anti-Fouling Treaty and projects and
activities to help developing countries implement the
POPs Convention.
PERFORMANCE DATA CHART
The following performance data chart includes
performance results for the FY 2001 Annual Perfor-
mance Goals (APGs) that support Goal 6. The
performance chart reflects the Agency's 1997 Strategic
Plan goals and objectives with which FY 2001 APGs
are associated. Relevant FY2000 and FY 1999 APGs
are included for ease in comparing performance.
Data quality information for Goal 6 can be found on
pages B-22 to B-29 of Appendix B, "Data Quality."
Additionally, the chart provides results for FY2000
and FY 1999 APGs for which data were not available
when the FY 2000 report was published, as well as
for FY 2000 APGs that are not associated with any
FY 2001 APGs.
Summary of FY 2001 Performance
Goal 6: Reduction of Global and Cross-Border Risks
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
FY1999-FY2001 Results
By 2005, ReduceTransboundary Threats to Human Health and Shared Ecosystems in North America
Consistent With Our Bilateral and Multilateral Treaty Obligations in These Areas,
As Well As Our Trust Responsibility to Tribes.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: EPA made significant progress in FY 2001 toward achieving this objective by reducing threats to
human health and shared ecosystems along the Mexican and Canadian borders. Improved water and wastewater services were provided
along the Mexican border through the Border Environmental Infrastructure Fund, and three air monitoring networks were established in
three of seven areas currently failing to meet national air quality standards. Along the Canadian border contaminated sediments were
removed or contained in Fox River/Green Bay, Wisconsin; Manistique River, Michigan; Grand Calument River/Indiana Harbor Canal,
Indiana; and Saginaw River/Bay, Michigan, thereby removing large amounts of toxic pollutants from the environment. Completion of the
Murmansk Initiative, a new radioactive waste facility in Russia, will prevent illegal dumping of radioactive waste into the Arctic Ocean and
Sea of Japan. EPA is on track to meet this objective.
APG37
FY 2001
Increase the number of residents in the Mexico border area who are protected from
health risks, beach pollution and damaged ecosystems from nonexistent and failing
water and wastewater treatment infrastructure by providing improved water and
wastewater service. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
Planned
Actual
- Number of additional people in the Mexico border area protected from health risks
because of adequate water/wastewater sanitation systems funded through the
Border Environmental Infrastructure Fund.
600,000 576,405
FY 2000 Five additional water/wastewater projects along the Mexican border will be certified for 10
design-construction for a cumulative total of 30 projects. Goal Met.
FY 1999 One additional water/wastewater project along the Mexican border will be certified for 9
design construction. Goal Met.
FY 2001 Result: Along the U.S.-Mexican border, communities live side-by-side, sharing both the benefits of rapid urban and industrial
growth and the environmental problems associated with a history of inadequate environmental infrastructure. To protect citizens on both
sides of the border from health risks, beach pollution, and damaged ecosystems from nonexistent and failing water and wastewater
treatment infrastructure, EPA provided improved water and wastewater services to 576,405 residents in the Mexican border area through
12 projects funded through the Border Environmental Infrastructure Fund, which is funded solely by EPA. EPA also provided technical
assistance for the water and wastewater projects. Focus this year was shifted to areas with smaller populations that have less access to
11-58 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
funding sources for wastewater projects, rather than the previous focus on larger areas that have more opportunities to locate wastewater
treatment funding. Although the number of people served was less than the FY 2001 target, more projects were completed than in
FY 2000 and areas with greater need for wastewater treatment were served. There are approximately 12.6 million residents in the entire
Mexican border area.
APG38
FY 2001
Planned
Great Lakes ecosystem components will improve, including progress on fish contaminants,
beach toxics, air toxics, and trophic status. Data Lag.
Actual
data
available
in FY 2002
Performance Measures
- Concentration trends of toxics (PCBs) in Great Lakes top predator fish.
- Concentration trends of toxic chemicals in the air.
- Trophic status and phosphorus concentrations in the Great Lakes.
declining trend
declining trend
improving trend
FY 2000 Measurable improvements in Great Lakes ecosystem components. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Indicator indices.
- Model predictions for toxics reductions.
10
5
FY 2001 Result: Final data will be available in 2002.
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.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: EPA is on target to achieve this objective. Since the mid-1990s the Agency's voluntary programs
have reduced U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by more than 240 million metric tons carbon equivalent (MMTCE) while saving families and
businesses an estimated $24 billion on their energy bills. This reduction is from 1990 estimates for expected GHG emissions through
FY 2000. EPA's climate protection programs have locked in substantial energy and environmental benefits for the next decade. Because
many of the investments promoted through EPA's climate programs involve energy-efficient equipment with lifetimes of decades or more,
the investments made through 2001 will continue to deliver environmental and economic benefits through 2010 and beyond. EPA currently
estimates, based on investments in equipment already made due to EPA's programs through 2001, that organizations and consumers
across the country will net savings of more than $60 billion through 2010 and greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced by more than
450 MMTCE through 2010 (cumulative reductions based on estimated 2001 achievements). These programs continue to be highly cost-
effective approaches for delivering environmental benefits across the country. For every dollar EPA has spent on its technology
deployment programs, these programs have reduced greenhouse gas emissions by more than 1.0 metric ton of carbon equivalent
(3.67 tons of CO ) and delivered more than $75 in energy bill savings based on cumulative reductions since 1995.
APG 39
FY 2001
Planned
Actual
Assess the consequences of global change (particularly climate change and climate
variability) on human health and ecosystems. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Peer-reviewed reports for decision-makers and the public on the potential
consequences of global change on three regions and on human health, which are the
finished products of a multi-year effort.
FY 2000 Assess the consequences of global climate variability at a regional scale. Goal Met.
«
ON
FY 1999 Conduct preliminary assessment of consequences of climate change at three geographical
locations: (Mid-Atlantic, Gulf Coast, and upper Great Lakes.) Goal Not Met.
FY 2001 Result: EPA conducts research under the Global Change Research Act of 1990, which mandates periodic scientific
assessments of the consequences of global change. In 1997 the U.S. Global Change Research Program initiated the First National
Assessment. The goal of this assessment is to determine the regional and national implications of climate change and variability for the
people, environment, and economy of the United States, in the context of other environmental, economic, and social stresses. EPA is
focusing on the consequences of global change to human health and ecosystems in the context of how it might affect individual regions.
Two Regional Assessments (Mid-Atlantic Regional Assessment and Great Lakes Regional Assessment) and the Human Health
Assessment were completed in FY 2001. The Gulf Coast Regional Assessment team will complete an additional overview document by
mid-FY 2002.
Over the past few years, people in the Great Lakes Region have experienced what the Regional Assessment report says might be more
common conditions in the future: warmer temperatures and increased evaporation have caused water levels to drop, causing serious
problems for the commercial shipping industry and recreational boaters. In addition, sea level has been rising 1 to 2 inches per decade
o
t
ea
o
BT
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-59
-------
along the Mid-Atlantic coastline. Climate change will likely double that rate, causing sea level to rise 15 to 40 inches during this century,
according to the Mid-Atlantic Assessment report. Sea-level rise threatens beaches, beach properties, wetlands, and barrier islands that
help shield the mainland from the impacts of storm surges.
APG40
FY 2001
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. Goal Met.
Planned
10
Actual
10
FY 2000 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.
Goal Met.
10
FY 2001 Result: EPA supported the development of rigorous bottom-up greenhouse gas inventories in four regions of Russia and in
Kazakhstan, including energy fuel balances and national estimates of selected sources such as coal mining. EPA projects in the countries
of the former Soviet Union have reduced greenhouse gas emissions by more than 1 MMTCE in the past 5 years. EPA's Integrated
Environmental Strategies Program, with cooperation from USAID, assisted eight developing countries in evaluating the environmental and
human health benefits of technologies and policies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Four of these countries produced initial
evaluations and implementation plans for multiple benefit strategies.
APG41
FY 2001
Demonstrate technology for a 80 mpg mid-size family sedan that has low emissions
and is safe, practical, and affordable. Goal Met.
Planned
80
Actual
80
FY 2000 Demonstrate technology for a 70 mpg mid-size family sedan that has low emissions and is safe,
practical, and affordable. Goal Met.
72
FY 2001 Result: The Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles program is working to advance vehicle engine and powertrain
technology to improve fuel efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in future vehicles. During FY 2001 EPA successfully
demonstrated technology for an 80-mpg mid-size family sedan with low emissions. As a result of this success, Ford Motor Company and
EPA jointly announced in October 2001 a significant cooperative effort whereby Ford will invest in further developing EPA-invented
technology with the goal of commercializing it.
APG42
FY 2001
Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions will be reduced from projected levels by approximately
66 million metric tons 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%. Data Lag.
Planned
66
Actual
data
available
in FY 2002
FY 2000 GHG emissions will be reduced from projected levels by more than 58 MMTCE per year 58 59.3
through EPA partnerships with businesses, schools, state and local governments, and other
organizations thereby offsetting growth in GHG emissions above 1990 levels by about 20%.
Goal Met.
FY 1999 Reduce U.S. GHG emissions by 35 MMTCE per year through partnerships with businesses,
schools, state and local governments, and other organizations. Goal Met.
46
o
to
I
at
\o
o
FY 2001 Result: The data for this annual performance goal will not be finalized until mid-2002. EPA is on track to meet its greenhouse gas
emissions reduction target of 66 MMTCE for FY 2001 .
FY 2000 Result Available in FY 2001: The earth's climate is predicted to change because human activities are altering the chemical
composition of the atmosphere through the buildup of greenhouse gases-Bfimarily carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. EPA
partnerships such as the ENERGY STAR program, Industrial Efficiency and Waste Management programs, Industrial Methane Outreach
program, and Transportation programs have resulted in a reduction of 59.3 MMTCE from 1990 projected levels of FY 2000 greenhouse
gas emissions. Although total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions rose in FY 2000, EPA partnerships have achieved a 20% reduction in
expected growth from 1990 levels, thus reducing the United States' contribution to the problem of global climate change. More information
is available at http://www.epa.aov/alobalwarming/.
APG43
FY 2001
Reduce energy consumption from projected levels by more than 75 billion kilowatt
hours, contributing to over $9 billion in energy savings to consumers and businesses.
Data Lag.
Planned Actual
75 data
available
in FY 2002
11-60
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
FY 2000 Reduce energy consumption from projected levels by about 60 billion kilowatt hours, 60 74
resulting in over $8 billion in energy savings to consumers and businesses that participate
in EPA's climate change programs. Goal Met.
FFY 2001 Result: The data for this annual performance goal will not be finalized until mid-2002.
FY 2000 Result Available in FY 2001: As a result of EPA's climate change programs, products purchased with the ENERGY STAR label
during FY 2000 will reduce energy consumption from 1990 projected levels by 74 billion kilowatt-hours over the lifetime of those products.
This adds up to more than $8 billion in energy savings to consumers and businesses that participate in EPA's climate change programs.
The energy savings target was exceeded because of increased penetration of energy-efficient products due to the successful efforts of
the ENERGY STAR program. EPA's efforts to reduce energy consumption result in reduced contributions to global climate change as
inexpensively as possible.
APG 44 Planned Actual
FY 2001 In close cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture, identify and
develop specific opportunities to sequester carbon in agricultural soils, forests, other
vegetation and commercial products, with collateral benefits for productivity and the
environment, with carbon removal potential of up to 25 MMTCE by 2010. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Infrastructure for carbon sequestration activities developed. 9/30/01 9/30/01
FY 2001 Result: Carbon can be sequestered through changes in both forestry and agricultural practices, but these actions are not
currently well understood or accepted in many sectors of the international environmental community. EPA is working collaboratively with
the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to address the misperceptions regarding carbon sequestration and to ensure that this
important mitigation option is developed in an environmentally sound and economically efficient way. During FY 2001 EPA continued to
work collaboratively with USDA on domestic pilot programs designed to address issues related to implementation of sequestration projects
both domestically and internationally. EPA also continued to enhance its state-of-the-art capability to evaluate the technical and economic
potential of carbon sequestration in both the forest and agriculture sectors and conducted key analyses on sequestration policy issues.
EPA expects to achieve a carbon removal potential of up to 25 MMTCE by 2010.
APG 45 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Provide analysis, assessment, and reporting support to Administration officials, the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the Framework Convention on Climate
Change. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Annual GHG inventory. 1 1
FY 2000 Provide analysis, assessment, and reporting support to Administration officials, the Inter-
governmental Panel on Climate Change, and the Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Goal Met.
Performance Measure
- GHG Inventory. 1
FY 2001 Result: Greenhouse gas emission reductions estimates were completed for the third National Communication Report to the
United Nations' Framework Convention on Climate Change. Updated greenhouse gas inventory estimates were published on schedule,
and work has started on a separate transportation sector greenhouse gas report. The following web site reports national greenhouse gas
emissions of CO2, CH4, N2O, MFCs, PFCs, and SF6, as reported to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change by
member nations: http://www.epa.aov/alobalwarmina/emissions/international/inventories.html.
I?
c-
By 2005, Ozone Concentrations in the Stratosphere Will Have Stopped Declining
and Slowly Begun the Process of Recovery. 5'
o
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: The United States is working with the Multilateral Fund established under the Montreal Protocol to ^
dismantle more than two-thirds of developing country CFC production capacity and virtually all of developing country halon production 5"
capacity. To date the Fund has reached agreements to eliminate 83% of remaining developing country CFC production and all halon ^
production and has begun to implement those agreements, resulting in significant environmental improvements. The United States has g
helped to fund 3,500 projects and activities in 124 countries that will eventually eliminate 150,000 metric tons of ozone-depleting £•
substances (ODS). Domestically, in FY 2001 the United States met its commitment to reduce methyl bromide production and import by g
50% from the 1991 baseline and listed 31 new alternatives to ODS for use in a variety of applications. Recent actions have focused on »
reducing those substances in developing countries where projected increases of ODS could cancel out the benefits of U.S. reductions. g1
EPA will know whether it is on track to meet the objective of stopping the decline of ozone concentrations by 2005 when the next 3-
international scientific assessment is published in 2002. *
^
35'
BT
www.epa.gov/ocfo Performance Results 11-61
-------
APG46
FY 2001
Provide assistance to at least 75 developing countries to facilitate emissions reductions
toward achieving the requirements of the Montreal Protocol. Goal Met.
Planned
75
Actual
76
FY 2000 Provide assistance to at least 50 developing countries to facilitate emissions reductions
toward achieving the requirements of the Montreal Protocol. Goal Met.
50
o
to
FY 2001 Result: Overexposure to ultraviolet (UV) radiation due to ozone depletion can cause a range of health effects, including skin
damage (skin cancers and premature aging), eye damage (including cataracts), and suppression of the immune system in humans.
Reductions in emissions of ODS slows the decline of stratospheric ozone concentrations. The United States provided assistance to
76 developing countries to facilitate reductions in ODS emissions to achieve the requirements of the Montreal Protocol on Substances that
Deplete the Ozone Layer. The benefits of reduced stratospheric ozone decline as a result of these reductions will be experienced in the
United States as well as in other countries.
APG47
FY 2001
FY2000
FY 1999
Restrict domestic consumption of class II hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) below
15,240 ozone depletion potential-weighted metric tons (OOP MTs) and restrict domestic
exempted production and import of newly produced class I chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs)
and halons below 60,000 OOP MTs. Data Lag.
Restrict domestic consumption of class II HCFCs below 15,240 OOP MTs and restrict
domestic exempted production and import of newly produced class 1 CFCs and halons below
60,000 OOP MTs. Goal Met.
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. Goal Met.
Planned
<15,240
<60,000
<1 5,240
<60,000
Actual
data
available
in FY 2002
13, 180
462
<208,400
< 130, 000
FY 2001 Result: The 2001 results will be available after March 15, 2002.
FY 2000 Result Available in FY 2001: The stratospheric ozone layer protects life on earth from harmful UV radiation; a depleted ozone
layer allows more UV radiation to reach the earth. The increased levels of UV radiation due to ozone depletion can lead to a greater chance of
overexposure to UV radiation and consequent health effects, including skin cancer, cataracts, and other illnesses. During FY 2000,
domestic consumption of class II HCFCs was restricted to 13,180 OOP MTs and domestic exempted production and import of newly
produced Class I CFCs and halons was brought down to 462 OOP MTs. These targets are maximum allowable quantities established for
the United States as obligations under the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. Virtually all U.S. producers and
importers of Class I CFCs and halons ceased operation following the January 1996 phaseout. Targets are tracked according to calendar
year obligations under the Protocol. For more information about EPA's ozone programs, see http://www.epa.gov/ozone/.
APG48
FY 2001
Increase the number of children
by 20%. Goal Met.
participating in the SunWise School Program
Planned
20%
Actual
61%
FY 2001 Result: EPA continues to fulfill its mission to protect human health through its SunWise School Program, which educates
children ages 5 to 12 on the risks associated with UV and sun exposure as a result of a depleted stratospheric ozone layer. Through the
use of classroom-based, school-based, and community-based components, SunWise seeks to develop sustained sun-safe behaviors in
schoolchildren. Learning about sun protection has an immediate and long-term benefit to the public because one serious childhood
sunburn can double the chances of developing skin cancer later in life and 80% of one's lifetime exposure to UV occurs before age 18.
During FY 2001 SunWise reached more than 9,000 students in 180 schools across the country, a 61% increase in program participation.
EPA exceeded its target of 20% because of sustained outreach efforts and outstanding acceptance by schools, teachers, and students.
The program has now reached a total of approximately 24,000 students in more than 475 schools. In 2001 students who participated in
SunWise reported a 68% increase in knowledge about using sunscreen, a 28.6% increase in wearing hats and shirts in the sun, a 33%
improved attitudes about tanning, and a 10% increase in playing in the shade rather than in the sun. The program aims to reach 17,000
schools by 2005.
I
at
\o
o
By 2005, the United States Will Prevent Significant Degradation of the Marine and Polar Environments,
Consistent With U.S. Obligations Under Relevant International Agreements.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: Major progress was made toward this strategic objective when the United States signed the
Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) in May 2001. Countries signing the convention committed to reduce and/or
eliminate the production, use, and/or release of the 12 POPs of greatest concern to the global community and established a mechanism to
add further chemicals in the future. Toxics covered by the convention include DDT, PCBs, and dioxins. EPA's goal is to have the United
States ratify the agreement by September 2002. EPA was also an active player in achieving the "Declaration of Dakar," which is a
statement by representatives of 25 Sub-Saharan African countries presenting a time line for phasing lead additives out of gasoline. EPA
education and capacity building efforts led to phaseout of leaded gasoline by the Philippines, Vietnam, and Jakarta, Indonesia, during
11-62 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
FY 2001. Thirty-six countries have already phased out the use of leaded gasoline, and this number will likely rise to 55 countries by 2005.
Currently about 78% of all gasoline sold in the world is unleaded, and this percentage will likely exceed 84% by 2005. EPA is on track to
achieve this objective.
By 2005, Increase the Application of Cleaner and More Cost-Effective Environmental Practices
and Technologies in the United States and Abroad Through International Cooperation.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: EPA's work to build drinking water treatment and monitoring capacity in Central America in the
aftermath of Hurricane Mitch was the most significant accomplishment under this objective during FY 2001. There are currently no
internationally accredited drinking water labs in Central America. Consequently, data on drinking water quality in the region is not reliable,
which impedes the development of effective programs to reduce the incidence of waterborne diseases. EPA's program to enhance
monitoring and surveillance at drinking water labs in the region allowed labs in El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Honduras to begin the
accreditation process. This success and the variety of projects described below will allow EPA to meet this objective by 2005.
APG 49 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Enhance environmental management and institutional capabilities in priority countries.
Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Number of countries or localities (3) that have adopted new or strengthened 3 3
environmental laws and policies.
- Number of organizations (3) that have increased environmental planning, analysis, 3 3
and enforcement capabilities.
- Number of organizations (3) that have increased capabilities to generate and analyze 3 3
environmental data and other information.
- Number of organizations (3) that have increased public outreach and participation. 3 4
- Number of targeted sectors (3) that have adopted cleaner production practices. 3 2
- Number of cities (3) that have reduced mobile-source based ambient air pollution 3 3
concentrations.
FY 2000 Deliver 30 international training modules; implement six technical assistance/technology 12
dissemination projects; implement five cooperative policy development projects; and 6
disseminate information products on U.S. environmental technologies and techniques to 5
2,500 foreign customers. Goal Met. 3,100
FY 2001 Result: International capacity-building programs play a critical role in achieving the Agency's mission. Lack of the necessary
managerial, technical, financial, scientific, and/or institutional capabilities has often been the major stumbling block to developing
countries' action on behalf of the environment, including progress in addressing global and transboundary environmental problems that
directly affect health and the environment in the United States. EPA has worked to build the environmental planning capabilities of
organizations in Jordan, Honduras, and Egypt and has worked with an organization in South Africa on improving enforcement capabilities.
The Agency completed pollution prevention projects in Egypt, the Philippines, Mexico, Thailand, and China. EPA is working with Thailand's
Department of Industrial Works to plan cleaner production projects targeted at the electronics industry and with the Thai Ministry of
Science, Technology, and Industry to develop a cleaner production program for the printing industry. Although EPA had hoped to initiate
both projects by the end of FY 2001, the Thai Ministry of Science, Technology, and Industry did not provide the data necessary to begin
the project prior to FY 2002. January 2002 is now the target date for launching the printing industry project. EPA initiated a program in
Bangkok to help municipal automotive fleets reduce their emissions, and the first phase of this project was completed in FY 2001.
A vehicle emissions tool designed to help developing countries characterize emissions problems and identify solutions was developed by
EPA in FY 2001. Pilot testing using the tool will begin in Santiago, Chile, in November 2001 and in Nairobi, Kenya, in March 2002. EPA's
international work has enhanced countries' abilities to protect their own environments as well as the global commons.
I?
Successfully conclude international negotiations on a global convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) reaching agreement on g-
FY 2000 Annual Performance Goals (No Longer Reported for FY 2001)
rnational negotiations on a global convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs,
POPs selection criteria, technical assistance, and risk management commitments on specified POPs. (This annual goal is maintained for &
internal reporting.) §
o
o"
I
ea
o
35'
BT
www.epa.gov/ocfo Performance Results 11-63
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
11-64 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 7 FY 2001 Obligations
$171 M
Note: EPA FY2001 Total Obligations
were $9,007 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.
PROGRESS TOWARD STRATEGIC GOAL AND
OBJECTIVES
EPA's Right-to Know goal has expanded over the
past 5 years.1 Today EPA is providing broader access
to more environmental information than ever before.
The Agency's work under Goal 7 recognizes that
environmental information is not just a collection of
data but rather a strategic resource to be used by
many different stakeholders and partners, including
federal agencies, states, tribes, local governments and
communities, regulated businesses, environmental
groups, the public, and EPA's own programs.
FY 2001 PERFORMANCE
Environmental information is one of EPA's most
valuable tools for protecting human health and the
environment. Ultimately, environmental information
must be accessible and useful to the public. During
FY 2001 EPA and its partners continued to make
progress in the development and implementation of
the National Environmental Information Exchange
Network, an advanced approach to sharing, managing,
and exchanging environmental information. In addition,
EPA laid the groundwork for designing an enterprise-
wide information technology architecture that will
provide a solid foundation for its electronic govern-
ment initiatives. The Agency is working to ensure that it
has the right information, useful analytical tools, and
sufficient access to enable decision-makers at all levels
to more effectively evaluate environmental conditions
that affect the health and well-being of the public.
EPA is working to increase the amount of infor-
mation available to stakeholders and partners and has
made progress in many areas. By the end of FY 2001,
EPA had implemented significant improvements to the
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Program, which greatly
increased the amount of information available to the
public and helped focus industry's attention on ways to
reduce toxic chemical releases. The Agency further
improved its web site, which is now easier to use and
increases the public's access to a wealth of information
at the local level about the state of the environment,
thereby helping expand understanding and providing
tools to protect families, communities, and environ-
ment; the new homepage features links to hot issues,
key topics, geography- and audience-specific informa-
tion, and more. EPA's information infrastructure is
more effective and secure than that of the past. The
progress made in FY 2001 moved EPA and the states
measurably forward in achieving the national vision
of e-government.
Access to Environmental Information
Providing the public with efficient electronic
access to environmental information is essential. Never
was this more apparent than in the days following
September 11, 2001. EPA quickly made available
electronic access to information on environmental
quality, giving the public and residents of the New
York City (NYC) area timely information about local
conditions. EPA worked closely with state, federal,
and local authorities to determine whether dangerous
levels of contaminants were present in ambient air,
1 In FY 2002 Goal 7 becomes "Quality Environmental Information." A description
of the new Goal 7 and its component objectives can be found in EPA's updated
Strategic Plan (EPA 190-R-00-002), published in September 2000.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-65
-------
EPA'S RESPONSE TO SEPTEMBER 11, 2001:
PROVIDING CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC
EPA has worked closely with New York and New Jersey
to make air quality data for the New York City region
available to the public. The EPA web site (http://
www.epa.gov/epahome/wtc/) allows users to view
monitoring data for nine different air contaminants
collected in the vicinity of New York City.
Maps can be viewed for all of New York City, Upper
Manhattan, Lower Manhattan, Brooklyn, the Bronx,
Queens, Staten Island, and New Jersey. By clicking on
any of the sampling locations, users can view data
collected since September 11, 2001.
drinking water sources, and surface water runoff near
the disaster sites. Drinking water and runoff in lower
Manhattan were sampled and tested, and repeated
monitoring of ambient air was conducted at the
World Trade Center disaster site, in the surrounding
New York and New Jersey areas, and in the vicinity of
the Pentagon. As soon as the results of monitoring
were finalized, EPA made the data available to the
public through its public access web site (http://
www.epa.gov/epahome/wtc).
Today the site also provides a comprehensive,
interactive tool, EnviroMapper for NYC response, that
allows users to view monitoring data in conjunction
with maps showing the location of sampling stations
around lower Manhattan and in New Jersey. Users can
select a location and see where monitoring activities are
being conducted, review measurements for many
substances (e.g., asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls
[PCBs], benzene, particulates), see aerial photographs
of the area, search by location for all information
about a particular site, or follow routes used by trucks
and barges to haul away debris and materials. In
addition, individuals from across the country can use
EnviroMapper (http://www.epa.gov/enviro/html/
em/index.html) to plot the locations of regulated
facilities in the area.
EPA is also developing an Agency-wide Public
Access Strategy to guide activities and improve
management of the web site and other information
channels. In FY 2001 EPA implemented policies to
ensure effective and efficient practices in its public
access efforts and launched its redesigned web site,
http://www.epa.gov, that has more features and
information and better meets the needs of users.
EPAs TRI Program, which publishes data on toxic
pollutants released into the environment, is a significant
contributor to the Agency's public information
holdings. EPA published the 1999 TRI data on
April 11, 2001, accompanied by an improved version of
TRI Explorer (http://www.epa.gov/triexplorer/),
an on-line "search and query" tool for both environ-
mental professionals and members of the public. In
January 2001 the Final TRI Lead Rule, which lowered
the thresholds for the manufacturing, processing, and
otherwise using of lead and lead compounds to
100 pounds, went into effect. Facilities exceeding this
threshold for lead are required to report their releases
and other waste management activities to EPA. This
will increase the amount of information on releases
and other waste management activities of lead and
lead compounds made available to the public. During
FY 2001 EPA also conducted 44 TRI workshops for
3,000 participants to educated those subject to TRI
reporting requirements.
While making much progress in improving
electronic access to environmental information, the
Agency faces the challenge of increasing the use of
that information by environmental managers and the
public. In FY 2001 EPA began work to develop
indicators of environmental quality. This effort will
11-66 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
result in a set of tools to strengthen understanding
of environmental conditions and human health effects
and will serve as the basis for a national state of the
environment report, scheduled for release in FY 2003.
Information Integration
More efficient information exchange between
EPA and its partners and Internet-based access to
information holdings at the national, regional, state,
and local levels will be essential in the future. Since 1998
EPA and the states have been working to develop the
National Environmental Information Exchange
Network—a secure, electronic, Internet-based network
for integrating, managing, and sharing environmental
data. The Exchange Network will be a common
intergovernmental framework and will showcase
EPAs move to e-government.
The Central Data Exchange (CDX), described at
http://www.epa.gov/cdx, is the new portal for
EPAs environmental data exchanges and a key
component of the Exchange Network. The CDX is
"open for business' and supports more than 40 states
and nearly 3,000 other registered users, including
territories, tribes, laboratories, and industry. Users of the
Network now have access to a suite of functions (e.g.,
user registration, information security, data receipt,
data processing, data distribution, and web hosting)
necessary to support secure electronic data exchange
between EPA and its industry and government partners.
EPAs Facility Registry System (FRS), http://
www.epa.gov/enviro/html/facility.html, also a
key component of the Exchange Network, is a
centrally managed database that provides Internet
access to a single source of comprehensive information
on facilities subject to EPAs environmental regulations.
When the Exchange Network is fully operational, FRS
master files will be the single, authoritative source for
facility-specific environmental information. At the
close of FY 2001, FRS had more than 630,000
records from 6 major EPA national information
systems and master facility records from 8 states,
exceeding the Agency's FY 2001 and FY 2002 targets.
Common data standards used by all partners are
essential to the Exchange Network. Data standards,
or agreed-upon formats and procedural rules for
commonly used data sets, are needed to reduce the
complexity of data manipulation and to make the
exchange and integration of data more efficient.
A State Partner's Perspective on the National
Environmental Information Exchange Network
"EPA and States have always been in the business of
sharing environmental data; it's a requirement for running
environmental programs. Now through our National
Environmental Information Exchange Network
partnership we're developing a new e-commerce model
for doing this business with better, higher quality data,
using jointly developed data standards and the latest Web-
based technologies being widely adopted by many
industry and government sectors. Our goals are less
burdensome data transactions for every level—regulated
facilities, States, Tribes, EPA—better information for
program management decisions, and improved public
assessment of real environmental conditions in New
Hampshire and across the country."
—Dana Bisbee, Assistant Commissioner, State of
Neif Hampshire, Department of Environmental
Services and Co-Chair of the ECOS State/EPA
Information Management Workgroup
During FY 2001 the Environmental Data Standards
Council (EDSC)—a group of experts from EPA, the
states, and the tribes—completed its review of two
new data standards and took steps to develop EPA
business rules for Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance, and Permitting. The EDSC also initiated
development of the next set of data standards.
Information Quality
In FY 2001 EPA also worked to ensure the
quality of environmental information provided
electronically through its public web site. The Agency
Integrated Error Correction Process (IECP),
launched in May 2000, is the Agency's principal tool
for web site users to report data errors for resolution.
By the close of FY 2001 EPA had resolved 650 of
the 1,000 suspected errors reported from May 2000
through September 2001.
Information Infrastructure
In FY 2001 EPA significantly increased the
capacity of its information technology infrastructure
to support greater public access to environmental
information and to facilitate secure exchange of
information among stakeholders. The Agency also
to
f
i
^
q
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-67
-------
made improvements in providing secure, cost-effective
telecommunications and computing capabilities.
In FY 2001 EPA improved its security measures
for electronic information exchange with its external
business partners using virtual private network
(VPN) technology, one of the most effective security
technology currently available. Additional security
improvements included an Agency-wide review of
security systems for all servers attached to the EPA
network, formalized internal and independent
security reviews for Agency information systems, and
implementation of improved security monitoring tools.
In FY 2001 EPA implemented an Enterprise
Architecture Planning process to more closely align
the Agency's information technology investments
with its environmental goals. This effort strengthens
Information Technology (IT) investment decision
making and management while saving resources.
Research Contributions
In FY 2001 EPA completed new or updated
consensus human health assessments for seven
Information Research:
The Scientific Visualization Center
EPA's vision is for its Scientific Visualization Center
(SVC) is to help make scientific visualization the standard
tool for analyzing environmental information, bringing
the results of environmental research to decision-makers,
and communicating with the public about the successes
and further needs of environmental protection.
Air Flow and Concentration Patterns: an example
product from the SVC.
environmental substances of high priority to the
Agency. These assessments, which were incorporated
into the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) and
made publicly available (http://www.epa.gov/iris/),
describe the potential human health impacts of
various chemicals found in the environment. This
information is used for hazard identification and
dose-response evaluations in risk assessments across
EPA, at the state level, and by the public. EPA also
enhanced its ability to make research information
available to the public by expanding its science inven-
tory, which is publicly available through the Environ-
mental Information Management System (EIMS;
http://www.epa.gov/eims). EIMS will provide
decision-makers with the best scientific information to
protect human health and the environment and will
ensure that research efforts are complementary.
STATE AND TRIBAL PARTNER
CONTRIBUTIONS
State Contributions
The Agency has worked successfully with its
state and tribal partners to implement the building
blocks of a National Environmental Information
Exchange Network. When complete, the Exchange
Network will eliminate the need for many program-
and region-specific data collection systems, improve
efficiencies, and thereby reduce costs.
Tribal Contributions
EPA, in cooperation with The Department of
Interior Bureau of Indian Affairs, is working closely
with tribal representatives to ensure that tribes
participate as full partners in the Agency's informa-
tion initiatives. The Environmental Data Standards
Council, a cooperative effort involving states, tribes,
and EPA, is pursuing standard "Tribal Identifiers"
for use in Agency systems and EPAs baseline assess-
ment of environmental conditions in Indian Country.
ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS OF FY 2001
PERFORMANCE ON FY 2002 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE PLAN
During FY 2001 the Agency exceeded its perfor-
mance goal for implementing the FRS. As a result,
new targets were established for FY 2002 and
beyond.
11-68 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
PERFORMANCE DATA CHART
The following performance data chart includes
performance results for the FY 2001 APGs that
support Goal 7. The performance chart reflects the
Agency's 1997 Strategic Plan goals and objectives
with which FY 2001 APGs are associated. Relevant
FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs are displayed for ease in
comparing performance. Data quality information for
Goal 7 can be found on pages B-29 to B-32 of
Appendix B, "Data Quality." The chart presents
results for FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs for which
data were not available when the FY 2000 report was
published, as well as for FY 2000 APGs that are not
associated with FY 2001 APGs.
Summary
Performance
Goal 7: Right to Know
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
FY1999-FY2001 Results
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.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: In FY 2001 the Agency continued to develop tools and support projects that provide the public
with the tools needed to make informed decisions concerning their health and the environment. EPA increased the timeliness and amount
of information made available on its web sites and continued its commitment to ensuring that the Agency's policies and programs address
issues faced by low-income and minority populations through public meetings, demonstration projects, and grants.
APG50
FY 2001
Planned
Actual
Improve public access to compliance and enforcement documents and data
through multimedia data integration projects and other studies, analyses and
communication/outreach activities. Goal Not Met.
Performance Measures
- By the end of FY 2001, all ten EPA Regions will have an enforcement and
compliance web site.
- Make 90% of enforcement and compliance policies and guidances issued this
fiscal year available on the Internet within 30 days of issuance.
- By April 2001, make summaries of all significant cases available on the Internet.
10
90%
100%
9
86%
Not
Available
FY2000 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. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Percent of OECA policy and guidance documents available on the Internet.
- Increase by 50% the number of states with direct access to Integrated Data for
Enforcement Analysis (IDEA).
94%
34 states
FY 2001 Result: Since the concept of improving public access to compliance and enforcement data is broad and difficult to quantify, the
Agency established several surrogate measures representative of EPA's efforts to provide the public with relevant enforcement information
in a timely manner. Although EPA did not meet the FY 2001 targets associated with this goal, the Agency continues to increase the
quantity and quality of compliance and enforcement information available to the public. See EPA's compliance and enforcement web site,
http://es.epa.gov/oeca/index.html. for more information. In addition to the Agency web site mentioned above, 9 of 10 EPA Regional web
sites provide clear links to relevant Regional compliance and enforcement activities. EPA's ongoing effort to standardize all of its web sites
will address these inconsistencies and provide the public with a more uniform look and feel to Agency web pages. Delays associated with
web site standardization prevented the Agency from attaining its goal of posting 90% of its compliance and enforcement policies and
guidance within 30 days of issuance. The remaining documents are in the process of being posted. Lastly, the Agency routinely posts its
significant enforcement cases, individually, on the web. In past years the Agency also posted a summary listing of all such cases; this
comprehensive listing was the basis for the creation of the third performance measure. In FY 2001, however, the Office of Enforcement
and Compliance Assistance (OECA) did not compile a comprehensive listing. Individual cases will continue to be posted on the web site.
APG51
FY 2001
Planned
Actual
Ensure that EPA's policies, programs and activities address disproportionately
exposed and under-represented population issues so that no segment suffers
disproportionately from adverse health and environmental effects. Goal Met.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-69
-------
Performance Measures
- Award 90 grants to organizations which address environmental problems in
communities comprised primarily of low income and minority populations.
- Hold 25 EPA-sponsored public meetings where disproportionately impacted and
disadvantaged communities participate.
- Respond within 60 days to 75% of requests made to each Region and National
Program Manager to address complaints heard during public comment period at
National Environmental Justice Advisory Committee (NEJAC) public meetings.
- Conduct 18 NEJAC meetings and focused roundtables in local communities
where problems have been identified.
- Increase the number of demonstration projects established under the Federal
Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice.
90
25
75%
18
18
79
25
> 75%
FY2000 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. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Number of EPA-sponsored public meetings held where disproportionately disadvantaged 31
communities participate.
- Number of grants awarded to low income, minority communities for addressing 62
environmental problems.
FY 1999 Provide over 100 grants to assist communities with understanding and address Environmental
Justice (EJ) issues. Goal Met.
100
FY 2001 Result: In FY 2001 the Agency continued its efforts to work with disproportionately exposed and underrepresented populations.
The Agency pursues its commitment to environmental justice (EJ) in a variety of ways, and several surrogate indicators of progress have
been established. EJ grants are awarded to community-based organizations that carry out projects to increase citizen involvement in EJ
issues. In FY 2001 EPA received fewer eligible grant applications than expected, so 79 grants were awarded rather than 90. Additionally,
the Agency strives to respond to comments made at public NEJAC meetings in a timely fashion. The NEJAC, a constituent-driven body,
produced two policy reports in FY 2001; several of the NEJAC subcommittees met only once during the fiscal year as opposed to twice as
in years past. Although there was a slight shortfall in the number of NEJAC meetings, there was no negative impact. The Agency also
supports demonstration projects established under a federal interagency work group on EJ. In FY 2001 the work group developed new
criteria for the selection of demonstration projects. More information on the Agency's EJ activities, including meeting summaries and grant
applications, can be found at http://www.epa.gov/oeca/ej.
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.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: In FY 2001 the volume of TRI data increased significantly as a result of new reporting
requirements for lead. EPA also published the 1999 TRI data on April 11, 2001. The new data were accompanied by an improved version
of TRI Explorer (http://www.epa.gov/triexplorer/). an online "search and query" tool for both environmental professionals and members of
the public who want to know about toxic releases in their communities, making both electronic and printed data more readily available.
APG52
FY 2001
Planned
Actual
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.
Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- TRI Public Data Release.
- Chemical submissions and
revisions processed.
1 report
110,000
1 report
120,000
FY 2000 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. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- TRI public data release.
- Form R's processed.
- TRIS database complete and report issued.
119,000
on target
"
o
11-70 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
FY 1999 Process 110,000 facility chemical release reports, publish the TRI Data Release Report, and 117,171
provide improved information to the public about TRI chemicals, enhancing community
right-to-know and efficiency processing information from industry. Goal Met.
FY 2001 Result: A 15- to 18-month data lag is associated with the release of TRI data because of reporting cycles and data quality
assurance/quality control. In FY 2001 EPA issued the 1999 TRI Public Data Release Report. TRI is a valuable source of information
regarding toxic chemicals that are being used, manufactured, treated, transported, or released into the environment. There has been a
chemical emissions decrease of 46% in the manufacturing industries, or about 1.5 billion pounds over the 12 years of the program. The
1-year decrease from 1998 to 1999 was 2.5%. Additional information on TRI can be found at http://www.epa.gov/tri.
By 2005, EPA Will Meet or Exceed the Agency's Customer Service Standards in Providing Sound
Environmental Information to Federal, State, Local, and Tribal Partners to Enhance Their Ability
to Protect Human Health and the Environment.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: In FY 2001 EPA's efforts focused on developing guidance on cumulative risk assessments and
ecological risk assessments that will assist risk assessors in their research efforts. Ultimately, the use of these products will enable the Agency,
as well as other environmental decision makers, to more effectively safeguard the public and the environment from potential risks.
APG 53 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Provide guidance for risk assessment to improve the scientific basis of environmental
decision making.
Performance Measures
- The Agency's Risk Assessment Forum will develop technical issue papers 1 framework 0
and develop a framework for preparing cumulative risk assessments.
- The Agency's Risk Assessment Forum will develop guidance on determining 1 guidance 0
management objectives and selecting assessment endpoints for ecological
risk assessment.
FY 2001 Result: EPA made considerable progress in developing documents to guide risk assessments. The risk assessment framework is
intended to serve as initial guidance, outlining a road map for research and future guidance development efforts. EPA's guidance on
selecting endpoints for ecological risk assessment will enhance EPA ecological risk assessments, contributing to more effective Agency
protection of ecological resources that are important to the public. Both guidance documents took longer to develop and review than
initially projected and are now scheduled to be completed in FY 2002.
FY 2000 Annual Performance Goals (No Longer Reported for FY 2001)
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.
All community water systems will issue annual consumer confidence reports according to the rule promulgated in August 1998. (This
annual goal is maintained for internal reporting.)
to
www.epa.gov/ocfo Performance Results 11-71
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
11-72 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 8 FY 2001 Obligations
IM
Note: EPA FY2001 Total Obligations
were $9,007 million
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 toward
improving environmental protection.
PROGRESS TOWARD STRATEGIC GOAL AND
OBJECTIVES
EPA relies on sound scientific research and
innovative new approaches to provide the under-
standing and technologies needed to detect, abate,
and avoid human health and environmental prob-
lems, as well as promote improved environmental
performance across all media—air, water, and land.
In FY 2001 EPA conducted research to improve
understanding of the principles underlying assess-
ment and management of environmental risks and to
allow the Agency to identify the most significant
sources of risk to human health and the environ-
ment. To ensure that EPA research is a source of
high-quality scientific and technical information, the
Agency consults a number of expert sources, both
internal and external, and uses several deliberative
steps in planning its research programs.
EPA also expanded its multiyear research plan-
ning efforts in FY 2001 to address all of its major
research programs to better assess progress toward
the strategic research objectives, including research
performed under this goal. As a starting point, the
Agency draws input from its Strategic Plan, available
research plans, EPA program offices and regions,
federal research partners, and outside peer advisory
bodies such as EPAs Science Advisory Board (SAB)
and others. In FY 2001 EPAs SAB conducted two
reviews addressing controversial pollutants that pose
significant environmental and human health risks:
(1) a reevaluation of the science underlying EPAs
dioxin reassessment, which was designed to
strengthen the Agency's evaluation of the health risks
of exposure to dioxin; and (2) an evaluation of the
costs and benefits of the arsenic drinking water
standard proposal supporting Administration and
congressional efforts to find an acceptable and
protective level of arsenic in drinking water. EPA
also works with industry, individual business facilities,
communities, state and local government agencies,
and other stakeholder groups to craft and implement
innovation strategies for better environmental results.
FY 2001 PERFORMANCE
Sound Science
EPA made an important contribution to the
characterization of ecological resources by completing
a baseline assessment of the conditions of the
Nation's estuaries (NationalCoostalConditionReport,
EPA620/R-01/005). Based on this report and subse-
quent surveys, changes and ultimately trends in the
ecological conditions of many of the Nation's estuaries
can be documented, with a known level of confidence,
and the results of environmental management policies
can be evaluated at the national, state, watershed, and
regional levels. This report provides an assessment of
historical conditions of many of the Nation's estuaries
and is based on the past 10 years of archived data
from federal and state sources, including data from
many programs with differing purposes and designs.
EPAs National Coastal Assessment (NCA) Program,
begun in FY 2000, will build on this report by using the
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
(EMAP) indicators and sampling designs covering
the estuaries of the entire coastal United States to
provide in 2003 the first statistically valid, nationwide
assessment of the health of these crucial ecological
resources (http://www.epa.gov/emap/nca/html/
abouthtml).
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-73
-------
National Coastal Condition
In FY 2001 the Agency also made significant strides
in understanding and detecting potential risks to human
health. In response to recommendations from the SAB,
EPA initiated an analysis of the National Human Expo-
sure Assessment Survey (NHEXAS), a program
investigating critical information gaps about popula-
tion-scale distributions of human exposures to con-
taminant mixtures. The NHEXAS analysis will
demonstrate the costs and benefits of a national-scale
exposure assessment program and will provide a basis
for the design and implementation of an effective
surveillance program for multimedia pollutants. In
addition, research in FY 2001 continued to focus on
understanding child-specific exposure to environmental
pollutants. EPA conducted studies on pesticide expo-
sure among farmworkers' children in California and
Washington State. Over the next several years, the
Agency will use the data from these studies to identify
the most effective methods for assessing children's
exposure and to develop exposure assessment models.
In FY 2001 the Agency also developed a protocol for
identifying endocrine-disrupting chemicals using
amphibian and small fish models. This protocol will
help to implement a legislatively mandated program for
testing chemicals that might cause adverse reproductive
and developmental effects through disruption of
endocrine systems controlled by sex steroids. The testing
program will help EPA effectively determine the toxicity
of various chemicals, so that the appropriate precau-
tions can be employed to protect human health.
Additionally, in response to an FY 1999 congres-
sional directive, the Agency provided recommenda-
tions on an appropriate reference dose, or RfD (an
estimate of the public's daily exposure to a compound
that is likely to be without an appreciable risk of
deleterious effects) for methylmercury, a highly toxic
compound that bioaccumulates in fish and animal
tissue. These recommendations will enable EPA to
set fish consumption advisories to effectively inform
the public of the effect of ingesting unacceptable
concentrations of methylmercury, thereby preventing
neurological and developmental harm. Information
on EPA's revised RfD for methyl-mercury is available
at http://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0073.htm.
11-74 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
In the area of pollution prevention research, EPA
produced decision tools that are more quantitative and
easier for stakeholders and decision-makers to use when
considering pollution prevention options, including
computer-based tools for chemical and industrial
processes. Additionally, EPAs Environmental Technol-
ogy Verification (ETV) pilot program evaluated 35
environmental technologies, and as a result, verified a
programmatic total of 164 technologies. Verification
results, which are publicly available on the ETV web
site (http://www.epa.gov/etv), provide purchasers
and permitters of environmental technologies with
highly credible data and performance analyses on which
to make decisions that directly affect the health and
well-being of populations and ecosystems.
The Agency declared EPA Science as a manage-
ment integrity weakness in FY 1995 in response to
concerns in a GAO review and the September 1993
Report of the National Performance Review regard-
ing the strength of EPAs environmental science
program and the scientific basis for decision making
related to EPA regulations and policies. EPA devel-
oped a corrective action strategy to address these
concerns and strengthen the Agency's environmental
science program. EPA completed final corrective
actions during FY 2001 and met with representatives
from GAO who acknowledged the Agency's progress
and along with EPAs Science Policy Council agreed
with the determination that this weakness had been
resolved. (Refer to Section III, "Management Accom-
plishments and Challenges," for further discussion.)
GAO conducted a review of the policies and
procedures of EPAs SAB related to the selection of
technical experts to serve on SAB panels. GAO
identified concerns that EPAs policies and proce-
dures do not ensure that SAB peer review panelists
are independent and that the panels are properly
balanced and that the public is sufficiently informed
about points of view represented on the panels. EPA
generally agreed with the GAO findings, declared the
balance and independence of SAB panels as an
Agency integrity weakness for FY 2001, and imple-
mented a corrective action plan to address the
concerns. (Refer to Section III, "Management
Accomplishments and Challenges," for further
discussion.)
Greater Innovation
The Regional Geographic Initiatives Program
(RGI) provides EPA regions an opportunity to
address unique, multimedia environmental problems
in a specific geographic area that are not readily
addressed by single media programs. RGI supported
120 projects in FY 2001 each contributing to at least
one of the Agency's environmental goals. An example
of a project that supports the Agency's clean air goal
is the Hyde Park Air Project in St. Louis, Missouri.
Under this project, data on emissions of hazardous
air pollutants are being collected, analyzed, and
evaluated. In addition, a coalition of federal, state,
and local air pollution control programs are working
with the local community, elected officials, and
industry to develop a work plan for addressing the
city's air quality problem.
FY 2001 Distribution of Regional Geographic
Initiative Projects Across Agency Goals
Pollution Prevention
22.0%
Better
Waste Management
3.7%
Global
3.0%
The Agency also continued to improve and
integrate a systematic approach to innovation based
on testing, evaluating, and disseminating innovations.
The number of innovations being tested continues to
grow: Project XL (eXcellence and Leadership)
exceeded its goal of 50 projects, and more than 40
new pilot proposals were submitted under the Joint
EPA/State Innovations Agreement, 14 of which
were implemented in FY 2001. The Agency has
accelerated its evaluation of innovations by
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-75
-------
g
BIOLOGICALLY INTEGRATED
FARMING SYSTEMS
Under the RGI program, EPA's Pacific northwest
region has run innovative agricultural pollution
prevention programs in California's Central Valley.
Partnering with state agencies, the University of
California, and agricultural industry groups, growers
adopt integrated pest and soil management methods
and reduce the use of pesticides such as
organophosphates (OPs). These chemicals are major
pollutants of surface water in the state and also are
targeted for reduction under the Food Quality
Protection Act. Without harming farm profits, the
program successfully eliminated use of OPs in
83 percent of the walnut orchards and all of the prune
orchards in the program, and reduced OPs by
59 percent in the participating apple orchards.
co-funding evaluations with other EPA offices and
establishing a successful Program Evaluation Net-
work. The Agency developed a successful model
approach in partnership with the state of Massachu-
setts to disseminate innovative permitting approaches
for small businesses to other states. Finally, in
FY 2001 EPA circulated a draft Innovation Strategy
that will further integrate innovation into its programs
and culture. Believing in the need for a focused
agenda to achieve results, EPA identified specific
environmental challenges where innovative
approaches will be essential for further progress. These
challenges — greenhouse gases, smog, water quality,
and water infrastructure — will be targeted for particular
resource and creative investments. Strengthening
environmental partnerships, targeting priorities,
expanding the current collection of tools, and creating
a more innovative culture to address challenging
problems effectively are the ultimate goals of the
innovation strategy.
In the latter half of 2000, EPA launched the
National Environmental Performance Track Pro-
gram to recognize and encourage top environmental
performers — those who go beyond compliance with
regulatory requirements to attain levels of environ-
mental performance that benefit people, communi-
ties, and the environment. Since then 250
high-performing facilities have been accepted into
the program; 47 more were under review as of
December 2001. Over the next 3 years the 250 mem-
bers are committed to reducing solid waste by 225
million pounds, hazardous waste by 8.8 million pounds,
energy use by 6.7 trillion British thermal units (BTUs),
water use by 1.6 billion gallons, hazardous materials use
by 1.7 million pounds, and volatile organic compound
emissions by 98,000 pounds, and to improving habitat
on 4,600 acres.
Industry sector performance partnership programs
also achieved significant accomplishments in
FY 2001. Stakeholder participation in the National
Metal Finishing Strategic Goals Program (SGP)
increased to nearly 500 facilities, 22 states, and more
than 85 local governments. Participating metal
finishing facilities show quantified results in their
progress toward the voluntary SGP performance
goals. For example, active SGP facilities have reduced
wastewater by 1.24 billion gallons, sludge shipped to
landfills by 2.7 million pounds, and organic chemical
emissions by 4 million pounds (measured as cumulative
annual reductions from 1992 baseline amounts).
Through the Sustainable Industries Partnership
Programs, EPA developed new partnerships with the
metal casting, meat processing, shipbuilding, and
specialty-batch chemical industries. Each of these
industries is setting voluntary performance improve-
ment objectives, while EPA, states, and other stake-
holders craft incentives, provide assistance, and
remove barriers to better performance. Also in
FY 2001 EPA created a "virtual" Center for Industry
Sector Innovation with tools and services that
address stakeholders' needs for better information-
sharing, planning, and measurement to support
federal and state sector-based programs. New tools
include the SectorSTAR (Strategies, Tools, and
Resources) web site, the State-Scan information
directory of state programs and priorities, enhanced
measurement tools, and a strategic process for
selecting new sector opportunities.
EPA supported further development of eco-
nomic information and analytical methods that will
improve economic analyses of its policies and
regulations, providing better tools for assessing
innovative alternatives. In FY2001 EPA offices
sponsored workshops on critical economic valuation
and policy assessment issues, including ecological
valuation methods and stated preference valuation
techniques. In addition, EPA and the National
Science Foundation continued to support new
11-76 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
economic research with solicitations directed at such
priorities as valuing human health benefits, market-
based mechanisms and economic incentives, and
corporate environmental performance and the
effectiveness of government intervention.
In FY 2001 the Regional Science & Technology
(RS&T) organizations provided field sampling,
analytical and data management support, and quality
assurance to Agency programs nationwide and
continued to expand the number of Centers of
Applied Science (CAS). CAS support the develop-
ment and application of new and innovative tech-
nologies by developing sampling, quality assurance,
and analytical methodologies. These methodologies
and technologies are shared both within EPA and
with the Agency's partners. One example is the EPAs
Great Lakes region Central Laboratory's develop-
ment of analytic methodologies for detection of
alkylphenol endocrine disrupters in water, soil and
sediments, which have been used in midwest rivers to
determine whether alkylphenols exist at amounts that
may show ecological effects. The RS&T organiza-
tions continued to strengthen their operations by
developing and implementing Corrective Action
Plans in response to Laboratory Assessments of
both internal quality systems reviews and external
technical systems audits. (Four assessments were
completed in FY 2001.) To date all of the corrective
actions have been implemented in four of the EPA
regions, and the remaining regions are working on
completing their corrective actions.
As an integral component of the Agency's
systematic approach to innovations, EPAs Office of
Policy, Economics and Innovation (OPEI) has
actively completed or initiated evaluations of EPAs
innovative programs and approaches. The Directory of
Regulatory, Policy, andTechnolagy Innovations evaluates more
than 70 innovations being tested by Project XL. The
report assesses the expected advantage of each XL
innovation over the current approach, the results to
date, the efficacy of the innovation, and its suitability
for application beyond the pilot scale. OPEI also
completed the first-ever assessment of Agency-wide
lessons learned on stakeholder involvement, support-
ing the development of EPAs Public Involvement
Policy. Stakeholder Involvement & Public Participation at
the U.S. EPA: Lessons Learned, Barriers, &* Innovative
Approaches reviews the Agency's efforts to involve the
public through a meta-analysis of formal evaluations
and informal summaries from across the Agency. The
meta-analysis identifies key cross-cutting lessons
learned, pinpoints unique barriers and ways to
overcome them, and highlights innovative
approaches to stakeholder involvement and public
participation. OPEI's Industry Performance Partner-
ship Program published Uving the Vision, a report on
the progress of the Metal Finishing Strategic Goals
Program that shows the degree to which the industry
met a series of voluntary "better than compliance"
facility performance targets.
Program Evaluation
EPAs Office of Research and Development
(ORD) and Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
agreed that program evaluation is appropriate for
environmental research, and the pilot evaluation
demonstrated the potential benefits of a partnership
approach to program evaluation. The primary tool
used in the evaluation was the "logic model," which
allows evaluators to identify the relationships
between resources, activities, outputs, customers, and
outcomes. One of the observations resulting from
the evaluation process was that annual performance
goals and measures focus primarily on outputs (such
as developing new methods, models, and tools)
rather than on achieving outcomes (the effects
resulting from the acceptance and use of these new
tools and technologies). Placing greater focus on
potential outcomes could assist ORD in identifying
the impact of its research on long-term environmental
results. When designed appropriately, high-quality
research allows the users of the research results to
achieve meaningful environmental outcomes.
STATE AND TRIBAL PARTNER
CONTRIBUTIONS
State Contributions
EPAs National Coastal Assessment Program
builds the scientific basis for representative cost-
effective monitoring of conditions and trends in the
Nation's estuaries; transfers this technology to states,
tribes, and regions; and encourages the states and
tribes to adopt and implement this approach. Using a
compatible, probabilistic design and a common set
of survey indicators (to measure factors such as
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-77
-------
•a
e
I
water quality, sediment quality, fish, and benthos),
each state conducts the survey and assesses the
condition of its coastal resources independently.
These estimates then can be aggregated to assess
conditions at the regional, biogeographical, and
national levels. EPA is accomplishing this assessment
through a number of partnerships with 24 of 26
coastal-marine states, tribes, the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Geological
Survey laboratories in the Southern Atlantic and
Gulf of Mexico regions, and the Delaware River
Basin Commission. In conducting this monitoring
program, EPA is leveraging an approximate 50/50
cost-share with the state monitoring programs. All of
the participating states either are evaluating or have
already adopted this new, cost-effective approach to
monitoring their coastal resources.
In FY 2001 EPA continued its work to support
and learn from innovation in the states, particularly
in partnership with the Environmental Council of
the States (EGOS). EPA received 26 projects in
FY 2001 and was negotiating or implementing
44 pilot projects under the Joint EPA/State Agreement
to Pursue Regulatory Innovation as of September 30,
2001. EPA, EGOS, and the Council for Excellence in
Government conducted an Innovations Symposium
in FY 2001 at which federal and state regulators
exchanged information and developed new partnerships
to innovate in the areas of information and technology,
market-based approaches, new models for environ-
mental protection, partnerships, and enforcement
and compliance.
In October 2000 EPAs OPEI, Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance and EPAs
northeast region formed a partnership with the
Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Protection (MA DEP). The purpose of this ongoing
partnership is to investigate whether the Massachu-
setts Environmental Results Program (ERP), a self-
certification alternative to general permitting, can be
transferred to other states and environmental man-
agement issues. Three states (Rhode Island, Florida,
and Maryland) and the District of Columbia have
agreed to conduct ERP pilot projects on a common
small business sector, auto body repair shops. This
application is in addition to MA DEP's success over
the past 3 years in mandatorily applying the ERP
process to the dry cleaning, photo processing, and
printing small business sectors.
Tribal Contributions
The Tribal Science Council (TSC), composed of
senior tribal and EPA representatives, will provide a
mechanism for systematic and thorough consideration
of tribal science needs and EPAs ability to address
the tribes' highest environmental science priorities.
Tribal Operations Committee co-chair and EPAs
Administrator endorsed the TSC in July 2001. The
TSC conducted its first face-to-face meeting
December 11—13, 2001, in Phoenix, Arizona. The
meeting focused on organizational issues, including
developing processes for how the TSC will address
tribal science priorities.
ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS OF FY 2001
PERFORMANCE ON FY 2002 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE PLAN
There are no changes to FY 2002 APGs based
on results of FY 2001 performance.
PERFORMANCE DATA CHART
The following performance data chart includes
performance results for the FY 2001 APGs that
support Goal 8. The performance chart reflects the
Agency's 1997 Strategic Plan goals and objectives
with which FY 2001 APGs are associated. Relevant
FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs are displayed for ease in
comparing performance. Data quality information
for Goal 8 can be found on pages B-32 and B-33 of
Appendix B, "Data Quality." Additionally, the chart
presents results for FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs for
which data were not available when the FY 2000
report was published, as well as for FY 2000 APGs
that are not associated with FY 2001 APGs.
11-78 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Summary
Performance
Goal 8: Sound Science
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
FY1999-FY2001 Results
By 2008, Provide the Scientific Understanding to Measure, Model, Maintain, or Restore, at Multiple Scales,
the Integrity and Sustainability of Ecosystems Now and In the Future.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: In FY 2001 EPA produced a report on the baseline conditions of the Nation's estuaries, providing
the scientific understanding necessary to measure the condition of these crucial ecological resources. By establishing a baseline with a
known level of confidence at the national, state, and regional levels, it will be possible to evaluate the results of environmental
management policies, which will in turn increase our ability to maintain and restore the integrity and sustainability of ecosystems.
APG54
FY 2001
Planned
Actual
Establish baseline conditions from which changes, and ultimately trends, in the ecological
condition of the nation's estuaries can be confidently documented, and from which the
results of environmental management policies can be evaluated at regional scales. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Report describing the condition of the nation's estuaries.
FY 2000 Report on monitoring findings in the Mid-Atlantic Region as a cost-effective means of measuring
the condition of these systems. Goal Met.
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.
FY 1999 Complete and evaluate a multi-tiered ecological monitoring system for the Mid-Atlantic region 1
and provide select land cover and aquatic indicators for measuring status and trends (2001).
Goal Met.
FY 2001 Result: The National Coastal Condition Report, a collaborative effort among EPA program offices, the coastal states, other
federal agencies, and EPA's Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP), is the first Ecological Report Card on the
United States' coastal resources.
FY 1999 Result Available in FY 2001: EPA completed and evaluated a multitiered ecological monitoring system for the Mid-Atlantic
region and provided select land cover and aquatic indicators for measuring status and trends. Products from the Environmental Monitoring
and Assessment Program (EMAP), such as the Mid-Atlantic Highlands stream report, have increasingly been used in environmental
management actions in the Mid-Atlantic region.
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.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: In FY 2001 EPA revised its analysis strategy for the National Human Exposure Assessment
Survey (NHEXAS). Implementation of the new analysis plan will assist the Agency in determining the effectiveness of a national-scale
exposure program. The Agency also continued to evaluate the exposures and effects of environmental contaminants, particularly in
children, and produced several reports on child-specific susceptibilities. FY 2001 research efforts provided significant findings regarding
environmental health risks and will strengthen the Agency's ability to make effective public health decisions.
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 Response to Change.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: In FY 200I EPA provided methods for identifying and characterizing the risks of developmental
and reproductive toxicants, which will assist the Agency in implementing a program to test chemicals that might have adverse effects on
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-79
-------
endocrine systems. This work also provides insight into how to prepare for, and respond to, other potentially adverse human health and
environmental risks.
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.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: In FY 2001 the Agency produced decision tools for use by decision-makers when considering
pollution prevention options and provided purchasers and permitters with credible data and performance analyses for 35 environmental
technologies. The Agency continued to develop more effective methods of reducing emissions of harmful pollutants associated with high-
priority human health and environmental problems.
APG55
FY 2001
Develop, evaluate, and deliver technologies and approaches that eliminate, minimize, or
control high risk pollutants from multiple sectors. Emphasis will be placed on preventive
approaches for industries and communities having difficulty meeting control/emission/
effluent standards. Not
Performance Measures
- Deliver a Report to Congress on the status and effectiveness of the Environmental
Technology Verification (ETV) Program during its first five years.
Planned
Actual
FY 2000 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. Goal Met.
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
FY 2001 Result: EPA completed a report on volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and hazardous air pollutants emissions from indoor
paints. The experimental data on VOC emissions can be used for exposure estimation and risk assessment purposes. The Agency also
completed performance evaluations of various metal finishing processes, which may effectively replace current hazardous and polluting
processes. Delivery of the ETV report to Congress was delayed to allow for more extensive data collection and analysis, which will
contribute to a more accurate and comprehensive report; it is now scheduled to be delivered by September 2002. To learn more about
ETV, visit http://www.epa.gov/etv.
By 2005, EPA Will Increase the Number of Places Using Integrated, Holistic Partnership Approaches,
Such as Community-Based Environmental Protection (CBEP), and Quantify Their Tangible and Sustainable
Environmental Result in Places Where EPA Is Directly Involved.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: Under the Regional Geographic Initiatives Program, EPA has supported 100 to 140 projects a
year (120 projects in FY 2001). These projects address problems that are not being addressed, wholly or in part, by existing national
environmental programs because of their unique geographic or cross-media nature. Projects are accomplished by working in partnership
with states, local governments, and the private sector. All of the projects support one or more of EPA's environmental goals. EPA has
analyzed possible methods of identifying and quantifying the gains in environmental outcomes associated with the projects and has linked
each of the projects to the Agency goal and objective it supports.
By 2005, EPA Will Increase the Number of Opportunities for and Applications of Sector-Based Approaches to
Environmental Management by 150% Over 1996 Levels.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: The Agency continued to improve and integrate a systematic approach to innovation based on
testing, evaluating, and disseminating innovations. The number of innovations being tested continues to grow, and the Agency has
accelerated its evaluation of innovations.
•a
e
I
APG56
FY 2001
Planned
Actual
EPA will implement significant improvements to core Agency functions identified as high
environmental or economic impact identified during FY 2000 priority setting
(Project excellence and Leadership-XL.) Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- High impact changes.
11-80
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
FY 2000 All 50 Project XL project will be in implementation. Goal Met. 50
FY 1999 50 Project XL projects will be in development or implementation, an increase of 23 projects 24
over 1998. Goal Met.
FY 2001 Result: In FY 2000 the Innovation Action Council identified a number of priorities for core program improvements, based either
on reforms already under consideration in the programs or on ideas drawn from pilot projects. By the end of FY 2001, the following
program improvements were complete or significantly under way: (1) TMDL rule under the Clean Water Act (issued); (2) consolidated air
rule for the chemical industry (issued); (3) Performance Track to provide incentives to top environmental performers (in implementation);
(4) an array of innovations in compliance assistance, ranging from an on-line database of compliance assistance information to
compliance guides for new rules (in implementation); (5) diffusion of a sector-based model for regulating small sources, based on the
Massachusetts Environmental Results Program tested in Project XL (diffusion efforts under way); and (6) a new EPA policy facilitating
cost-effective disposal of residential lead-based paint debris (issued).
By 2005, Regions Will Have Demonstrated Capability to Assess Environmental Conditions in Their Region,
Compare the Relative Risk of Health and Ecological Problems, and Assess the Environmental Effectiveness
of Management Action in Priority Geographic Areas.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: The Regional Science & Technology (RS&T) organizations support EPA's air, water, waste, and
toxic substances programs by providing field sampling, analytical and data management support, and quality assurance to Agency
programs nationwide. Regions have developed special capabilities and expertise (Centers of Applied Science) based on unique
geographic and demographic issues. Centers have been designated in the areas of ambient air monitoring; environmental biology,
chemistry, and microbiology; and analytical pollution prevention methodologies. The RS&T organizations continue to strengthen their
operations by developing and implementing Corrective Action Plans in response to Laboratory Assessments of both internal quality
system reviews and external technical systems audits (four assessments completed in FY 2001). Quality assurance programs in the EPA
regions ensure the integrity of environmental data by overseeing management of monitoring programs, approving data collection activity
plans, and evaluating monitoring and laboratory practices.
Conduct Peer Reviews and Provide Guidance on the Science Underlying Agency Decisions.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: In FY 2001 the SAB conducted peer reviews on 23 projects including significant impact, supporting
the Agency's decisions on controversial pollutants posing significant environmental and public health risks, such as dioxin and arsenic.
Prior Year Annual Performance Goals Without Corresponding FY 2001 Goals
(Actual Performance Data Available in FY 2000 and Beyond or With Performance Targets Beyond FY 2001)
APG Planned Actual
FY 1999 Initiate field exposure study of children to two endocrine disrupting chemicals. target
year is
FY 2008
FY 1999 Develop and verify innovative methods and models for assessing the susceptibilities of target
population to environmental agents, aimed at enhancing risk assessment and management year is
strategies and guidelines. FY 2008
FY 2000 Annual Performance Goals (No Longer Reported for FY 2001)
Develop risk assessment guidance and regional assessments concerning risks to children exposed to environmental contaminants.
Develop tools to identify hazards and formulate strategies to manage risks from exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals capable of
inducing adverse effects in humans and wildlife.
V)
www.epa.gov/ocfo Performance Results 11-81
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
11-82 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 9 FY 2001 Obligations
391 M
Note: EPA FY2001 Total Obligations
were $9,007 million
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.
PROGRESS TOWARD STRATEGIC GOAL AND
OBJECTIVES
Ensuring compliance with environmental statutes
and regulations is a fundamental element of EPA's
mission. Protection of human health and the environ-
ment can only be achieved when there is compliance
with environmental laws. EPA fulfills its goal of
providing "a credible deterrent to pollution and
greater compliance with the law" by identifying
significant environmental risks and noncompliance
patterns, developing tailored strategies to address those
problems, and measuring the results of these efforts.
Meeting this goal presents many challenges to
EPA, state, local agencies, and federally recognized
tribes. There are millions of regulated entities that
range from community drinking water systems to
pesticide users to major industrial facilities. Regulated
entities must comply with a multitude of complex
regulatory requirements under various environmental
statutes. These challenges require EPA to use many
different tools to maximize compliance. EPA obtains
continuous improvement in compliance with
standards, permits, and other requirements by
providing assistance designed to prevent violations,
incentive policies to motivate self-auditing by regulated
entities, inspections and monitoring to identify
violations, and enforcement actions to correct and
deter violations. These improvements in compliance
result in improved environmental management by
regulated entities, and increased protection of the
environment for the public.
EPA's use of assistance, incentives, monitoring,
and enforcement produces measurable results for
environmental protection. For last several years,
EPA's enforcement and compliance assurance
program eliminated 1 to 2 billion pounds of pollution
from air, land, and water through enforcement
actions; compelled violating companies to invest 2 to
3 billion dollars in environmental improvements;
provided 1 to 2 million regulated entities with
compliance assistance; and completed agreements to
conduct self-audits and correct violations with 1 to 2
thousand facilities.
FY 2001 PERFORMANCE
EPA continues to make progress toward its goal
of ensuring full compliance with the law through
civil, judicial, and administrative enforcement actions
as well as encouraging improved compliance through
assistance and incentives. The national enforcement
and compliance program, under Goal 9, met or
exceeded 100 percent of its annual performance
goals; the enforcement and compliance program,
therefore, continues to meet the Agency's objectives
of improving the environment by increasing compli-
ance through a strong enforcement presence and
promoting the regulated community's compliance
with environmental requirements through voluntary
compliance incentives and assistance programs.
During FY 2001 EPA, along with state and tribal
partners, provided information and assistance to help
facilities comply with environmental laws; completed
agreements with facilities and companies to conduct
their own self-audits and correct violations; and took
civil and criminal enforcement actions to address
serious environmental problems and ensure fairness
in the marketplace.
Enforcing the Law, Achieving Results
The Agency uses compliance inspections, investiga- §
tions, and other assessments to determine the
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-83
-------
"
2-
o
e
Q
—
2
•3
as
o
compliance status of regulated facilities. Additional
inspections are conducted to help deter facilities
from lapsing into noncompliance. In FY 2001 EPA
conducted 17,812 inspections and 368 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 into navigable waters in harmful
quantities. Where necessary, EPA addresses noncom-
pliance with an enforcement action appropriate to
the violation. Administrative compliance orders and
penalty complaints, Notices of Violations, civil
referrals to the Department of Justice (DOJ), civil
judicial settlements, or criminal referrals to DOJserve
as a deterrent for other potential noncompliers,
provide an environmental benefit project to improve
the environment or communities, and ensure fairness
to those companies that invest resources to comply
with environmental laws.
EPA enforcement actions against noncomplying
facilities often result in outcomes such as improvements
in environmental management practices by facilities,
improved or enhanced monitoring and reporting,
environmental benefits projects, and significant
reduction of pollutants discharged to the air, water, or
land. EPAs FY 2001 enforcement actions required
reduction or prevention of emissions or discharges of
an estimated 660 million pounds of pollutants and
required the treatment of an additional 1.8 billion
pounds of contaminated soils, sediments, or water.
In FY 2001, 74 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 50 percent
of actions required improvements in facility environ-
mental management practices, including testing,
training, and overall improvements to environmental
management systems. In FY 2001 polluters were
required to spend more than $4.3 billion to correct
violations, known as "injunctive relief," and take
additional steps to protect the environment. Settle-
ment of enforcement cases often produce Supple-
mental Environmental Projects (SEPs), in which
violators perform additional environmentally beneficial
projects beyond the required injunctive relief in
exchange for a penalty reduction. SEPs totaled
J.I million in FY 2001.
In FY 2001, EPA took 3,548 civil, judicial, and
administrative enforcement actions. Examples of
significant cases include:
• United States and State of Mississippi v. Morton
International, Inc.
A routine EPA inspection of a Morton Inter-
national Inc. chemical manufacturing facility in Moss
Point, Mississippi, revealed that the firm falsified
Escatawpa River pollutant discharge monitoring
reports. The discovery of these falsified reports precipi-
tated a comprehensive, multi-media investigation by
EPAs southeast region and the Mississippi Department
of Environmental Quality. On October 26, 2000, the
United States and the State of Mississippi lodged a
criminal plea with a $2 million fine, and proposed
civil settlement involving thousands of violations of
several environmental laws, including the Safe
Drinking Water Act, Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act,
and laws governing hazardous waste and toxic
substances. The $36 million civil action against Morton
International, Inc., included a $20 million cash penalty
and $16 million in SEPs. Morton also agreed to conduct
a comprehensive site investigation, periodically certify
compliance, and undertake third-party national audits
of all 23 of Morton's other chemical manufacturing
facilities. The SEPs include a $10 million pollution
prevention/reduction plant project, a $4 million City of
Moss Point lateral line sewer replacement project, and a
$2 million research project with the University of
Southern Mississippi's School of Polymer Science. This
is the largest EPA civil fine at a single facility.
• Magnesium Corporation of America (MagCorp)
EPA resolved problems associated with a persistent
hazardous waste polluter ranked first for chlorine
emissions nationwide on the 1998 toxics release
inventory (TRI), MagCorp, through a strong enforce-
ment presence. In 1998, MagCorp emitted 57 million
pounds of chlorine. After many years of work by the
Utah Department of Environmental Quality, EPA
led efforts to resolve hazardous waste compliance
issues at the facility. Several continuing enforcement
actions resulted from the intensive investigation. One
outcome from this enforcement investigation includes
an Administrative Consent Agreement, whereby
MagCorp will replace electrolytic cells with an
expected 95 percent reduction in chlorine emissions.
Electrolytic cell use reduced chlorine discharge by
54 million pounds from 1998 levels.
11-84 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
• Petroleum Refining Sector
EPA addressed four significant areas of noncom-
pliance with the CAA through settlements with four
major refining companies. Settlements with Koch
Petroleum, BP Amoco, Marathon Ashland Petroleum,
and Motiva/Equilon/Shell required increased pollution
controls and operational changes at 27 refineries that
represent 28.8 percent of domestic refining capacity
(4,760,000 barrels). The addition of pollution con-
trols, combined with operational changes, will result
in an estimated pollution reduction of 87,000 tons of
sulfur oxides (SOx), 49,500 tons of nitrogen oxides
(NOx), 8,220 tons of volatile organic compounds
(VOC), and 2,100 tons of particulate matter annually.
Under the settlements, the companies will pay
approximately $28 million in penalties, $1.3 billion in
injunctive relief, and spend $12 million in SEPs.
Estimated Annual Pollution Reductions
in the Petroleum Refining Sector
in
o
VOC
PM
EPA maintained a strong criminal enforcement
program that emphasized environmental results and
effective partnerships with federal, state, tribal, and local
governments to enhance compliance and protect the
public and the environment nationwide. EPA focuses
this program on investigations of violations which pose
a significant threat to human health and the environment
and help successfully prosecute cases which provide
effective deterrence, by incorporating an aggregate
high level of fines, restitution, and jail sentences. EPA
opened 482 criminal investigations, referred 256
cases to the DOJ, and helped prosecute cases which
resulted in 256 years incarceration and $95 million in
fines and restitution in FY 2001. An example of a
successful prosecution with significant sanctions is:
• Caleb-Brett Laboratories
A criminal prosecution against Caleb-Brett
Laboratories resulted in a $1 million fine as well as a
3-year probation sentence for conspiring to mislead
EPA investigators about a scheme to falsify chemical
analyses involving hundreds of millions of gallons
of reformulated gasoline (RFG). The defendant
schemed to falsify data on tests of reformulated
gasoline samples to make it appear as if the gasoline
met EPA standards for cleaner burning fuel.
Approximately 200 to 300 million gallons of the
substandard gasoline were distributed in New York,
New Jersey, and Connecticut.
EPA has been developing a statistically valid
methodology to better measure compliance rates for
selected industrial populations regulated by EPA.
EPA piloted the methodology in FY 2000 and
implemented the program for six populations during
FY 2001. The petroleum refining and iron and steel
sectors were evaluated using legally required self-
monitoring reports in the Agency's national data
system for one or more toxic pollutants. Municipal
sewage treatment plants were evaluated for conven-
tional pollutants including Biological Oxygen
Demand (BOD) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS).
Within the petroleum refining sector, 6.6 percent of
facilities measuring ammonia levels had Technical
Review Criteria (TRC) violations. Iron and steel
sector facilities were found to have noncompliance
rates of 5.0 percent and 22.2 percent respectively for
lead and zinc. Noncompliance rates were 12.9 percent
and 15.8 percent respectively for BOD and TSS in
the municipal sector. In FY 2001 regions and states
conducted RCRA compliance monitoring inspections at
randomly selected small quantity generators (SQGs) in
the Organic Chemical industry and determined that
34.3 percent were in statistically significant noncom-
pliance. In FY 2002 EPA will focus on Combined
Sewer Overflows (CSOs) compliance with nine
minimum controls and Ethylene Oxide Maximum
Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards.
Increasing Compliance Through Assistance
EPA developed a wide range of information
tools and services with the intended outcome that
they improve understanding of regulatory compliance
requirements. EPA targets compliance assistance
activities to regulated facilities, industry sectors, trade
associations, compliance assistance providers, and the
public. Recipients may access Agency information
such as fact sheets and compliance checklists through
different pathways, including the Internet and
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-85
-------
workshops. The Agency reached 555,000 entities in
FY 2001 through compliance assistance activities.
These compliance assistance activities, as discussed
below, can result in process or management changes
that reduce emissions and noncompliance.
EPA continued to provide financial and other
support to 10 Internet-based Compliance Assistance
Centers created to help small and medium-sized
businesses, local governments, and federal facilities
understand and comply with their regulatory obliga-
tions. In FY 2001, target audiences and the public
visited the Centers more than 485,000 times, an increase
of 19 percent from FY 2000. These visits included over
150,000 requests for web pages and targeted compli-
ance documents. Compliance assistance center
surveys found that 72 percent of company and local
governments reported taking one or more actions as
a result of Center assistance. For example, 33 percent
of these respondents implemented production process
changes, and 13 percent implemented waste handling
changes. Furthermore, of those that could determine
whether or not there was a cost savings associated with
the action(s) taken, 65 percent indicated that they had
realized a cost savings. Seventy-four percent of these
companies and local governments stated that they
realized one or more environmental improvements
(e.g., reduced air emissions) as a result of Center
assistance. The Centers can be accessed through
http://www.assistancecenters.net.
EPA launched the National Assistance Clearing-
house in FY 2001. This Clearinghouse is a web-
based, searchable reference tool that provides quick
access to compliance assistance materials and a
means for users to interact with EPA, states, and
other compliance assistance providers. The Clearing-
house can be found at http://www.epa.gov/
clearinghouse. It now contains almost 4,500 links
including resources from all 50 states. For the first
time the public can access compliance assistance
information by sector, media, tool type, and geo-
graphic location from just one web site—finding
needed information is much quicker and easier.
EPA published its first annual Compliance Assistance
Activity Plan in FY 2001. The Plan is the first-ever
compilation of compliance assistance activities
planned across EPA regions and headquarters
offices. The FY 2001 Plan established a baseline of
Agency compliance assistance activity, identifying 368
activities initiated during FY 2001. As a planning tool
Compliance Assistar
Activity Plan
Fiscal Year 2001
it helped EPA and external compliance assistance
providers by highlighting planned projects, identifying
partnership opportunities, and avoiding duplication.
Increasing Compliance Through Incentives
In FY 2001 EPA's Audit and Self-Policing Policy
provided a significant incentive for many facilities
and companies to improve their environmental
management practices. The expected outcome from
this policy is that regulated facilities will detect,
disclose, and correct environmental violations in
exchange for a waiver or significant reduction in
penalties from EPA. The benefit to the public is that
facilities come into compliance quickly, fewer govern-
ment resources are expended to produce compliance,
and emissions are reduced or eliminated. More than
300 companies used this EPA policy to report and
resolve violations at 1,754 facilities in FY 2001. EPA
actively solicited companies or industry sectors
through initiatives to use the policy to improve
environmental management at facilities.
EPA also promotes self-auditing by developing
audit protocols that can be used by facilities and
companies as part of an Environmental Management
System (EMS). In FY 2001 EPA published protocols
for conducting environmental compliance audits
under the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act, CERCLA Section 103, for
Hazardous Waste Generators under RCRA, and for
Municipal Facilities under EPA's Wastewater
11-86
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
IRON AND STEEL MINI-MILLS
EPA was concerned about the high noncompliance
rate (30 percent) of the iron and steel mini-mill sector
(mills that make new steel from recycled. In particular,
management of electric arc furnace dust (a hazardous
waste) and additional air pollution controls at new
and modified mini-mills were the focus of EPA
concerns over noncompliance in the steel mini-mill
sector. EPA sent letters to 41 steel mini-mills, inviting
them to participate in a voluntary audit and self-
disclosure initiative based on EPAs Audit Policy. Mills
that disclosed and corrected violations within
6 months were eligible for penalty reductions or
elimination as outlined in the Audit Policy. The result
of this initiative was that 24 companies disclosed
violations at 38 facilities. Ten facilities which did not
receive invitation letters, still chose to audit, disclose,
and correct violations. This indicates that industry and
facilities shared information about the initiative on a
large scale , since facilities not identified by the EPA
resolved 12 company disclosures with no penalties,
and expects to assess a penalty for violations disclosed
by 7 companies at 13 facilities. The environmental
outcome from this is that the companies clean up
spilled electric arc furnace dust, change
management practices to eliminate releases into
storm water or air, and repair cracked secondary
containment around storage tanks to minimize the
impact if a release occurs.
Regulations. In addition, the Agency included EMS
provisions in 21 settlements of enforcement cases.
EMSs impact more than 150 facilities because many
recent settlements containing EMS provisions
require the company to use EMSs on a corporate-
wide basis. In FY 2001 EPA entered into settlements
requiring EMS improvements at 66 facilities.
Program Evaluation
Program evaluations completed in FY 2001 that
support the overall Goal 9 are listed in Appendix A.
STATE AND TRIBAL PARTNER
CONTRIBUTIONS
In an EPA-funded report entitled State Environ-
mental Agency Contribution to Enforcement and Compliance,
the Environmental Council of the States (EGOS)
found that states conducted approximately 90 percent
of all enforcement actions taken by both the states and
EPA. EGOS reports that 71 percent of federal programs
enacted by law are delegated to the states. States
provide a very large percentage of the data in national
environmental data systems. Given the magnitude of
the state and tribal role in ensuring environmental
compliance, EPA makes considerable effort to coordinate
with and enhance the capabilities of state, tribal, and
local compliance and enforcement programs.
Twenty-four states began programs to develop
outcome measurements for compliance assistance
initiatives, improve the quality of compliance data
systems, and increase public access to compliance
information. Four states are modeling programs on
the Massachusetts Environmental Results Program to
provide compliance assistance and self-certification in
various industry sectors. In addition, Colorado,
Connecticut, Maryland, and Massachusetts received
funding and assistance from EPA to develop out-
come-based performance measures and environmen-
tal indicators which will be used as models for
Performance Partnership Agreements between states
and EPA regional offices. The purpose of these
grants is to increase state capacity for providing
compliance assistance and continuing enforcement
activities. The results from these grants should be
seen during the next 1 to 2 years.
EPA continued capacity-building efforts in
FY 2001 by delivering 128 courses to more than
5,155 federal, state, and tribal law enforcement
personnel that will improve their ability to identify
and reduce noncompliance. As a way of providing
states with hands-on experience and improved
inspection capacity, EPA and the states jointly
conducted 895 inspections. During FY 2001 EPAs
National Enforcement Training Institute (NETI)
launched its "virtual university," NETI OnLine,
making its curriculum accessible to enforcement
personnel nationwide (http://www.epa.gov/oeca/
oceft/neti.html). EPA increased the number of
government organizations registered to use the
Online Tracking Information system (OTIS), which
provides enhanced data analysis for identifying
patterns of noncompliance by industry sector,
geographic area, and statute. OTIS usage increased
dramatically over the past fiscal year—receiving
between 6,000 and 10,000 queries per month from
«
so
I
S;
S"
s?
5?
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-87
-------
the 133 government agencies now registered (including
agencies from all 50 states).
EPA also benefitted from the participation of state,
tribal, and local law enforcement agencies in 93 criminal
task forces and law enforcement coordinating committees
across the country. California, Florida, Texas, and
Colorado participate in these cooperative law enforce-
ment efforts that investigate and prosecute cases that
represent community-based health and environmental
priorities, and build state, local, and tribal law enforce-
ment capacity.
ASSESSMENT OF FY 2001 IMPACTS ON
THE FY 2002 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE
PLAN
In its FY 2002 annual performance goals, EPA
scaled back its inspection target from 17,000 to
15,000. This change was made to more carefully
adjust targets based on the declining availability of
inspectors to do compliance monitoring.
EPA also exceeded its target for pollutants
reduced in requiring a 660 million pound reduction,
rather than the initial 350 million pound target. This
enormous total attests to the success of a cogently
targeted enforcement program that protects human
health and the environment. In addition, EPA exceeded
its target for the number of tribal environmental
personnel trained and the number of tribal govern-
ments provided with computer based training modules.
Initial estimates did not factor in a much greater than
anticipated interest in environmental training by tribal
governments and staff.
PERFORMANCE DATA CHART
The following performance data chart includes
performance results for the FY 2001 APGs that
support Goal 9. The performance chart reflects the
Agency's 1997 Strategic Plan goals and objectives
with which FY 2001 APGs are associated. Relevant
FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs are displayed for ease in
comparing performance. Data quality information
for Goal 9 can be found on pages B-33 to B-38 of
Appendix B, "Data Quality." Additionally, the chart
presents results for FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs for
which data were not available when the FY 2000
report was published, as well as for FY 2000 APGs
that are not associated with FY 2001 APGs.
Summary i
Performance
Goal 9: A Credible Deterrent to Pollution
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
FY1999-FY2001 Results
Identify and Reduce Significant Non-Compliance in High Priority Program Areas, While
Maintaining a Strong Enforcement Presence in All Regulatory Program Areas.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: Over the past two fiscal years, EPA exceeded its targets to protect the environment and human
health from air, land, and water pollution through the required reduction of 1,374 million pounds of pollutants. The vast majority of civil
enforcement actions taken now require facilities to take direct action to correct illegal discharges of pollutants and change facility
management and information practices. Twenty percent of civil enforcement actions required improvements that will reduce or prevent the
amount of pollutants released into the environment, and half of all civil enforcement actions required facilities management or information
management changes. EPA continued to improve the quality and accuracy of enforcement and compliance data through completion of
another phase of a new ICIS computer database. This system, once operational, will add a much needed new enforcement tool to
increase the ability of the Agency and the states to identify and target the most serious noncompliance and address the most significant
air pollution, soil pollution, water pollution, and human health risks. States, localities, and tribes received a number of capacity building
tools including training and assistance with enforcement inspections as a direct result of environmental enforcement and compliance
outreach. In FY 2000 and FY 2001, EPA conducted 1,608 joint inspections with states, localities, and tribes. During that same period EPA
continuously renewed its commitment to environmental compliance monitoring by conducting 959 criminal investigations and 1,028 civil
investigations. Since 1999 EPA has also conducted 59,345 inspections. In FY 2001 EPA trained 5,155 state, local government, and tribal
personnel in inspection and enforcement skills. EPA continues to meet international commitments to track hazardous waste exports
through review of 100% of the transboundary hazardous waste notices submitted.
APG57
FY 2001
Planned
Actual
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 pollutant reductions and/or changes
in practices at facilities. Goal Met.
11-88
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Performance Measures
- 75% of concluded enforcement actions require pollutant reductions and/or changes 75% 74%
in facility management or information practices.
- Estimated pounds of pollutants reduced. 350 M 660 M
- Increase or maintain existing compliance rates or other indicators of 5 populations 6
compliance for populations with established baselines, or develop additional
rates for newly selected populations.
- Reduce by 2 percentage points overall the level of significant non-compliance 2% 2.4%
recidivism among the Clean Air Act (CAA), Clean Water Act (CWA), and Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) programs from FY 2000 levels.
- Increase by 2% over FY 2000 levels the proportion of significant non-complier 2% 1.33%
facilities under CAA, CWA, and RCRA which returned to compliance in less than 2 years.
- Produce a report on the number of civil and criminal enforcement actions initiated 1 1
and concluded.
FY 2000 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. Goal Met.
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.
714 M
13.6
5
1
1
1
FY 1999 Deter non-compliance 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. Goal Met.
21,410
3,935
FY 2001 Result: In FY 2001, 74% of concluded enforcement actions required pollutant reductions and/or changes in facility management
or information practices, resulting in the estimated reduction of approximately 660 millions pounds of pollutants. Enforcement actions led
to a reduction of 2.4 percentage points in the level of significant noncompliance recividism among the Clean Air Act (CAA), Clean Water
Act (CWA), and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) programs from FY 2000 levels. Finally, enforcement actions led to an
increase of 1.33 percent over FY 2000 levels in the proportion of significant noncompliance facilities under CAA, CWA, and RCRA which
returned to compliance in less than 2 years. The Agency determined that the human health and environmental benefits derived from a
greatly exceeded pollution reduction target, 660 million pounds, far outweigh marginally missed targets for performance measures on
reducing the time it takes for facilities to return to compliance and the percentage of enforcement actions requiring pollutant reductions.
APG58
FY 2001
EPA will conduct 17,000 inspections, 450 criminal investigations, and 250 civil investigations,
targeted to areas that pose risks to human health or the environment, display patterns of
non-compliance, or include disproportionately exposed populations. Goal Met.
Planned
17,000
450
250
Actual
17,812
482
368
FY 2000 EPA will conduct 13,500 inspections, 500 criminal investigations, and 150 civil investigations,
50% of which are targeted at priority areas. Goal Not Met.
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.
20,123
660
477
15
«
so
I
s?
5?
FY 1999 Deter non-compliance 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. Goal Met.
21,410
3,935
FY 2001 Result: In FY 2001 the Agency exceeded the targets for inspections and investigations. EPA conducted 17,812 inspections,
482 criminal investigations and 368 civil investigations.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-89
-------
APG 59 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Improve capacity of states, localities and tribes to conduct enforcement and compliance
assurance programs. EPA will provide training as well as assistance with state and tribal
inspections to build capacity, including implementation of the inspector credentials program
for tribal law enforcement personnel. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Number of EPA training classes/seminars delivered to states, localities and tribes to 220 128
build capacity.
- Conduct EPA-assisted inspections to build capacity. 150 895
- The National Enforcement Training Institute will train tribal personnel. 105 428
- The National Enforcement Training Institute will provide tribal governments with 50 235
50 computer-based training modules.
- Total number of state and local students trained. 4,900 4,727
FY 2000 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. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Number of EPA-assisted inspections to build capacity. 713
- Number of EPA training classes/seminars delivered to states/localities and tribes to build capacity. 154
FY 1999 Assist states and tribes with their enforcement and compliance assurance and incentive 218
programs. EPA will provide specialized assistance and training, including 83 courses,
to state and tribal officials to enhance the effectiveness of their programs. Goal Met.
FY 2001 Result: In FY 2001 EPA met its goal of improving capacity of states, localities and tribes to conduct enforcement and compliance
assistance programs. The agency continued to build local capacity by conducting 895 EPA-assisted inspections. Tribal governments
received 235 computer-based training modules and 428 tribal personnel received training. The 4,727 state and local students trained
was slightly below targeted levels. The missed target for the number of state and local students trained represents a relative decrease in
historic enrollment levels. EPA was unable to meet the target for the number of EPA training classes/seminars delivered to states, localities,
and tribes due to an increased demand for distance learning computer training modules, which are more cost efficient, and have the potential
to reach a larger number of students overall than courses taught in traditional classrooms. The measure concerning training classes has been
eliminated for FY 2002, since it is less meaningful than the number of students reached. EPA determined that this capacity building goal was
met based upon the relatively more significant capacity building benefits achieved through exceeded targets for NETI training courses
and EPA assisted inspections with states who conduct the bulk of environmental inspection work.
APG 60 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Maintain and improve quality and accuracy of EPA's enforcement and compliance data to
identify non-compliance and focus on human health and environmental problems. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Complete Phase I of Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) Phase 1 Phase 1
development (programming) and begin design of Phase II.
- Complete Quality Management Plan (QMP) project for additional data systems. 3 systems 0
- Complete detailed design (development of screens, prototypes) including a 1 system 1
pilot NPDES permitting desk model for Permit Compliance System (PCS) system
modernization.
- Continue operation and maintenance/user support of 14 information systems 95% 95%
housing national enforcement and compliance assurance data with a minimum
g of 95% operational efficiency.
'•= - Conduct four data analyses of environmental problems in Indian Country using 4 12
« the American Indian Lands Environmental Support Project (AILESP) and the
— baseline assessment survey.
j3 FY 2001 Result: In FY 2001 the Agency maintained and improved the quality and accuracy of the enforcement and compliance data.
u Operation and maintenance/user support for 14 information systems housing national enforcement and compliance assurance data
Q occurred at the targeted 95% efficiency level. EPA conducted 12 data analyses of environmental problems in Indian Country. EPA was
jj unable to complete Quality Management Plans for the 3 targeted data systems due to the need for development of new, specialized
•2 quality management strategies better suited to environmental enforcement and compliance data issues. As targeted, in FY 2001 EPA
g completed the detailed design for the Permit Compliance System modernization. EPA determined that APG 60 was met based upon
^ outcomes derived from an enhanced, integrated ICIS environmental data system and modernization of the Permit Compliance System.
1 Improvements to the ICIS and PCS systems represent relatively more important environmental and human health benefits than the
_ benefits associated with Quality Management Plans geared towards measuring the quality of environmental data system software and
S
o
11-90 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
hardware in that these systems improve the Agency's ability to ensure compliance and more efficiently target the most significant
sources of pollution across several statutes.
APG 61 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Ensure compliance with legal requirements for proper handling of hazardous
waste imports and exports. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Review and respond to 100% of the notices for transboundary movement of 100% 100%
hazardous 100% wastes, ensuring their proper management in accordance with
international agreements.
FY 2000 Ensure compliance with legal requirements by assuring that hazardous waste exports
from the United States are properly handled. Implement U.S. international commitments,
and gain enforcement and compliance cooperation with other countries, especially along
U.S. borders (Mexico/Canada). Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Ensure compliance with legal requirements by assuring that hazardous waste exports 1,584
from the United States are properly handled (Number of import and export notices
filed and reviewed).
FY 2001 Result: In FY 2001 EPA met its goal of ensuring compliance with legal requirements for proper handling of hazardous waste
imports and exports by reviewing and responding to 100% of the notices for transboundary movement of hazardous wastes.
Promote the Regulated Communities'Voluntary Compliance With Environmental Requirements
Through Compliance Incentives and Assistance Programs.
Progress Towards Strategic Objective: EPA continued to exceed its goals to encourage facilities to voluntarily initiate identification, self-
disclosure, and correction of compliance violations. As a result of FY 2001 and FY 2000 actions, 3,954 facilities took advantage of
voluntary programs to self-correct compliance violations. EPA will attempt to expand efforts to specifically encourage disclosure by
companies suspected of having serious violations, which, as a class, occur less frequently and require more complex analysis to address.
APG 62 Planned Actual
FY 2001 Increase opportunities through new targeted sector initiatives for incentives to
voluntarily self-disclose and correct violations on a corporate-wide basis.
Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Complete settlements with 500 facilities to voluntarily self-disclose to the Federal 500 1,754
government and correct violations.
FY 2000 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. Goal Met.
Performance Measure
- Number of facilities that self-disclose potential violations. 2,200
FY 2001 Result: In FY 2001 EPA significantly exceeded its target to increase opportunities, through new targeted sector initiatives, for
facilities to voluntarily self-disclose and correct violations on a corporate-wide bases by completing settlements with 1,754 facilities. EPA
exceeded this target, in part, through the success of agency-initiated incentive programs that encourage industry to initiate inspections
and correct violations before a fine or enforcement action takes place. g1
APG 63 Planned Actual ?
>
FY 2001 Promote the use of Environmental Management Systems (EMS) to address known £>
compliance and performance problems. Goal Met. c.
S;
Performance Measures c
o
- Increase EMS use by developing tools, such as training and best practice manuals that 3 tools 10 tools £
3 tools encourage improved environmental performance and conduct research and 3
evaluation of EMS's. =
o
FY 2001 Result: In FY 2001 EPA achieved its goal of promoting the use of Environmental Management Systems to address known 2?
compliance and performance problems. It developed 10 new tools, such as training and best practice manuals, that encouraged improved £?
environmental performance. o'
www.epa.gov/ocfo Performance Results 11-91
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
11-92 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 10 FY 2001 Obligations
IM
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.
Note: EPA FY2001 Total Obligations
were $9,007 million
PROGRESS TOWARD STRATEGIC GOAL AND
OBJECTIVE
EPA's progress toward effective management and
fiscal responsibility is highlighted by quick response
to changing needs while maintaining high standards
for resource stewardship and customer service. In
critical management areas such as workplace security,
higher federal standards for accountability and
financial management, managing changing needs for
workforce skills, and keeping pace with new technology,
EPA provided the management operations and
customer service to support Agency environmental
results. Building on plans and initiatives currently in
place, EPA will continue to implement its strategic plan
for workforce recruitment, development, and retention
and further integrate resource and performance
information for greater accountability.
In FY 2001 the Agency made significant strides
toward accomplishing its strategic goal. Of particular
note in FY 2001, the Agency:
• Hired 32 interns, bringing the total to 111 interns
over 4 years. This diverse group of interns was
selected based on their academic accomplish-
ments, leadership potential, commitment to
career in public service and interest in environ-
mental issues. These interns are rotated through
headquarters and regional EPA organizations to
develop a cross-agency, multimedia perspective.
• Demonstrated financial integrity in its FY 2001
Financial Statements for which the Agency
received an unqualified opinion. Expedited
financial statement preparation by implementing
an automated reporting package.
• As a result of work performed by the Office of the
Inspector General (OIG), issued a cease and desist
order to a utility company that was dumping
untreated effluent including 1.5 tons of nitrogen
directly into Dryman Bay, Florida. Closure of this
facility immediately reduced the imminent risk and
improved the quality of the water in and around the
Bay. The company was ordered to pay fines and
penalties totaling over $1.75 million for this violation.
FY 2001 PERFORMANCE
In fulfilling its management commitments, the
Agency focused 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.
Additionally, within the framework of these priorities,
EPA began addressing the five challenges outlined in
"The President's Management Agenda." They are
Strategic Management of Human Capital, Budget
and Performance Integration, Competitive Sourcing,
Expanded E-government, and Improved Financial
Management.
Managing Human Capital
With the expected retirement of a large number
of senior employees, the Agency faces various
challenges in managing its human resources. This
includes recruiting and retaining a highly skilled and
diverse technical staff, providing employees with the
competencies needed to effectively implement the
Agency's strategic goals, and building a sense of
community while recognizing differences. The
Agency has begun to address these issues through its
human resources strategic plan Investing in Our People:
EPA's Strategy for Human Capital, 2001-2003. This plan
calls for the development of a competency-based
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-93
-------
"Workforce Planning Model," which will ultimately
give managers at all levels the tools to anticipate the
kinds, degrees and duration of skills and
competencies needed to meet future program
requirements. This plan will also help determine the
optimal means of acquiring these competencies, via
contract, interagency agreement, recruitment, or
development of personnel already onboard. To
expedite hiring, the Agency launched "EZHire@EPA,"
a web-based automated recruitment system which
makes EPA more competitive in the job market.
Since the system came online last summer, over 4,000
EPA employees have
become EZHire
registrants, as have
more than 18,000
from outside EPA.
With EZHire@EPA,
http://www.epa.gov/ezhire/, the Agency expects
to be able to attract and hire the employees with the
experience and skills needed to deal with changing
environmental needs. Refer to Section III,
"Management Accomplishments and Challenges,"
for further discussion.
The Agency is committed to providing an
environment where its employees are afforded equal
access to all opportunities and where they are treated
fairly. Specifically in FY 2001 EPA created a task
force that will develop an approach to eliminate the
backlog of Title VI complaints (complaints filed by
entities that receive federal resources) and developed
civil rights training now required for supervisors and
managers; all EPA supervisors and managers are now
required to receive this training. EPA also implemented
one clear set of guidelines that addresses Agency-
wide fairness in all employment and personnel
practices in every EPA office.
Streamlining Business Processes and Meeting
Customer Needs
The Agency strengthened its financial management
practices to enhance customer confidence in the
delivery of the Agency's environmental results. In
FY 2001, according to the House Government Reform
Subcommittee on Government Efficiency, Financial
Management and Intergovernmental Relations, EPA
improved its rating on financial management from
D- in FY 1999 to B- in FY 2000. In addition, among
the 24 departments and agencies covered by the
Chief Financial Officers Act that submit perfor-
mance reports, EPAs rating rose from 11th to 6th on
the Mercatus Center ranking of the 2nd Annual
Performance Report Scorecard. EPA issued the
FY 2001 Financial Statements on time and received
an unqualified audit opinion from the Office of the
Inspector General (OIG). The OIG commended the
Agency for significantly improving the financial
statement preparation process. Of particular note
EPA resolved an Agency weakness in the financial
statement preparation process. (Refer to Section III,
"Management Accomplishments and Challenges,"
for further discussion.)
EPA made strides in using electronic government
techniques to better provide integrated budget and
cost information as part of the Agency's work to set
priorities and serve customers. Continuing the
development of the Financial Data Warehouse, EPA
expanded the amount of cost and financial informa-
tion available for managerial decision-making in
FY 2001. During the year usage of the system more
than doubled as EPA added more data from finan-
cial, grant and contracts systems. Agency managers
and staff can access real-time, user-friendly financial
and management information using web-based tools.
EPA also incorporated pre-GPRA costs into its
reporting process, thereby improving financial
tracking for goals and objectives. Other EPA accom-
plishments included an improved methodology to
better account for grant funds and execution of a
new accounting policy to track Agency-wide invest-
ments in information technology management.
FY 2001 also was the first full fiscal year in which the
new Superfund indirect cost methodology applied to
all Superfund response costs, thereby increasing the
amount available for cost recovery.
In partnership with state and local governments,
EPA is streamlining its business practices and
expanding the use of E-government. For example,
the Integrated Grants Management System (IGMS)
allows for electronic submission of grant applica-
tions and improves the speed and user-friendliness
of the entire grants process. Five regions began
processing applications electronically in FY 2001.
EPA has made its contracting opportunities more
accessible to the private sector by posting request for
proposals (RFPs) on the Federal Business Opportu-
nities (FedBizOpps) web site (http://cbd.cos.com).
11-94 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
The Agency has completed phase one of EPA's
new automated Human Resources Information
System, using PeopleSoft software. Phase I was
implemented in all of the Agency's human resources
offices. It includes modules for processing personnel
and benefits actions, managing positions, inputting
performance ratings and interfacing with the
Agency's payroll system. This system has resulted in
increased human resource personnel performance
and productivity throughout the Agency.
EPA also continues to expand automation of
internal processes to reduce costs and improve
services. In FY 2001 the Agency successfully completed
pilot testing and began full implementation of a
system to automate the entire process of reimbursing
employees for their travel expenses. By the end of
FY 2002, all employees will have access to this
system. In addition, EPA purchased software and
awarded an implementation contract for replacing
the Agency's legacy payroll system with fully auto-
mated systems that will integrate payroll and human
resources functions. EPA also began evaluating
options for replacing its core accounting system.
Thanks in large part to its automation and
streamlined business practices, EPA earned a total of
$750,000 in rebates and discounts for prompt
payments on the Agency bankcard and to contractors,
respectively. These funds are available to program
offices to support EPA's environmental mission.
Additionally, all but a handful Agency salary
payments and payments to contractors were made by
electronic funds transfer in FY 2001, and overall
percentages for electronic payments for all payment
types were about 90 percent for the year.
As part of its efforts to provide the public with
cost effective and efficient services, EPA continues
to carefully review its Federal Activities Inventory
Reform Act (FAIR Act) process. The review is
designed to ensure that EPA maintains an effective
plan to competitively source activities which are
identified as being commercial in nature to determine
whether they are more efficiently and effectively
performed in-house or by the private sector.
EPA's Environmental Finance Program assists
communities in their search for creative approaches
to funding environmental projects and provides
recommendations on environmental finance issues,
trends, and options. The program provides informa-
EXAMPLES OF EFC NETWORK
INNOVATIONS
Syracuse University, in EPA's New York region,
initiated the "Public Management and Finance
Program (PMFP)" that helps coordinate the delivery
of technical assistance to rural communities.
University of Maryland, in EPA's mid-Atlantic region,
worked with counties in two states bordering the
Potomac River (Frederick County, MD, and Berkeley
County, WV) to develop groundwater protection plans
that would benefit the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
Boise State University, in EPA's Pacific northwest
region, developed a capital improvement planning and
financing software program for small water and
wastewater utilities to use in assessing their capital
facilities and on the basis of that assessment, prepare
a multiyear financing plan.
tion on financial alternatives for state and local
environmental programs and small businesses,
utilizing an online database containing abstracts of
publications, case studies, and contacts. Visits to the
Environmental Financing Information site (http://
www.epa.gov/efinpage) nearly doubled in FY 2001.
The program also supports the Environmental
Finance Center (EFC) Network, which is composed
of nine universities working to develop innovative
solutions that help local governments manage the
cost of environmental protection.
Investing in EPA's Infrastructure
In FY 2001 the Agency completed projects that
will significantly reduce energy consumption at EPA-
owned laboratories. The Agency replaced old chillers
(machines that provide chilled water to cool the
building) at the Narragansett laboratory. The new
chillers are 20 percent more efficient than the chillers
they replaced. EPA also moved into the New England
Regional Laboratory in Chelmsford, Massachusetts,
that will provide savings through energy-efficient
fumehoods, state-of-the-art building control systems,
and sun-shading panels. At its research complex in
Cincinnati, Ohio, the Agency made the largest and
cheapest Green Power purchase in its history by
procuring the rights to wind and landfill gas generated
electricity for the next 3 years at a cost less than
o
S.
ea
5s
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-95
-------
conventional electric power. By the end of 2002,
EPA will receive an estimated 9 percent of its electric
needs through environmentally preferred power
sources.
EPA had also planned in FY 2001 to install a
demonstration fuel cell at the Fort Meade Laboratory.
The fuel cell is a new technology that results in the
highest expected efficiency for fuel conversion and
produces negligible pollution. However, this project
has been delayed by circumstances beyond EPAs
control. In March 2001 one of the project's financing
partners withdrew from the project. As a result of
this withdrawal, it was not feasible to begin the
design of the fuel cell and the design and construction
of the mechanical building until all potential partners
have been identified and the balance of the funding
is available.
Protecting Children's Health
EPA has worked inside and outside of the
government to make children's environmental health
protection a continuing priority. Children's environ-
mental health accomplishments are captured in many
of the goals in this report, as shown in the chart at
the end of this section. In addition, EPA and the
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
funded 4 new Centers for Children's Environmental
Health and Disease Prevention Research, bringing
the total number of centers to 12. The four new
centers will research the relationship between environ-
mental exposures and developmental disorders. EPA
and HHS, co-chairs for the interagency Task Force
on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to
Photo courtesy of the Parks and People Foundation
Children, are continuing to implement strategies to
reduce environmental triggers of asthma in children
and childhood lead poisoning and are exploring ways
to improve school environments.
The Agency's Office of Children's Health Protec-
tion works closely with national associations to
further children's environmental health protection in
the states. In FY 2001 EPA supported the Environ-
mental Council of the States (EGOS) and the Associa-
tion of State and Territorial Health Officials who
convened a first-ever meeting of more than 100 high-
level officials representing 63 environment and health
agencies from 39 states to begin designing an agenda
for working together to reduce exposure to environ-
mental triggers of childhood asthma. In cooperation
with the Agency, the National Conference of State
Legislatures developed an online database of
children's environmental health legislation for state
legislators to use when proposing similar legislation.
EPA also worked with the American Nurses Associa-
For information and tips
on protecting children from environmental threats,
call toll-free (1-877-590-KIDS) or check out
EPA's web site at http://www.epa.gov/children.
n I H*>
11-96 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
tion (ANA) to provide independent study modules
on children's environmental health for the estimated
150,000 ANA members and with the American
Academy of Pediatrics to train incoming Chief
Pediatric Residents about environmental health risks
to their patients. This program has reached all of the
pediatric residency programs in the United States.
EPA issued a report on America's Children and the
Environment: A First View of Availabk Measures,
addressing environmental factors that may affect the
health and well-being of children in the United
States. This first-time report provides trends for five
environmental contaminants, one biomonitoring
indicator, and two childhood illnesses that may be
influenced by environmental factors. The report is a
starting point for discussions among policymakers
and the public about how to improve federal data on
children and the environment, and in the long term,
to develop measures to track and understand the
environmental health experience of children and
evaluate ways to improve it.
Improving Management and Program Operations
EPA continued efforts to integrate budget and
performance information to support better decision-
making and priority-setting. The Agency made
progress in developing measures of environmental
results. The FY 2002 Final Annual Performance
Plan/Congressional Justification contained more
outcome-based annual performance goals, which
increased the percentage of outcome-based goals
from 23 percent in EPAs FY 2001 Final Annual
Performance Plan/Congressional Justification to
29 percent in FY 2002.
EPAs Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
developed recommendations that led to improve-
ment in the Agency's business practices and environ-
mental results, including the following areas:
• Submitting timely and complete financial
statements that are accurate and have adequate
accounting support.
Note: See the specific
Goal
Goall
GoalS
Goal 4
Goal 6
GoalS
Goal 9
goal chapters for more discussion of the issues.
Children's Health Impacts
EPA's Diesel Rule wall reduce emissions of air pollutants to prevent 17,600 cases of acute bronchitis in
children annually and will help avoid more than 360,000 asthma attacks and 380,000 cases of respiratory
symptoms in asthmatic children per year.
EPA significantly reduced the use of two pesticides that pose a risk to children. In addition, the Food Quality
Protection Act mandates the protection of infants and children through use of an extra tenfold safety factor in
setting pesticide tolerances, unless scientific data indicate that a different factor is warranted.
The Agency initiated a collaborative program with industry and national experts to assess the risks of a key set
of chemicals to which children are disproportionately exposed. Also, EPA launched the Voluntary Children's
Chemical Evaluation Program in June with commitments by 34 companies to fully assess the risks of 20
chemicals to which children might be disproportionately exposed.
EPA continues to fulfill its mission to protect human health through its Sun Wise School Program, which
educates children ages 5—12 on the risks associated with ultraviolet (LTV) and sun exposure as a result of a
depleted stratospheric ozone layer. Through the use of classroom-based, school-based, and community-based
components, Sun Wise seeks to develop sustained sun-safe behaviors in schoolchildren. Learning about sun
protection has an immediate and long-term benefit to the public, since one serious childhood sunburn can
double the chances of developing skin cancer later in life, and 80 percent of one's lifetime exposure to UV
occurs before age 18. During FY 2001 Sun Wise reached more than 9,000 students in 180 schools across the
country, a 61 percent increase in program participation.
In FY 2001 EPA conducted studies on pesticide exposure among farmworker children in California and
Washington State. Over the next several years, the Agency will use the data from these studies to identify the
most effective methods for assessing children's exposure and to develop exposure assessment models.
In 2001 the Agency successfully prosecuted the first criminal case involving a violation of the Lead Hazard
Reduction Act, affecting approximately 15 low-income rental properties in the District of Columbia and
Maryland. In addition, EPA conducted more than 650 civil investigations and issued 47 civil complaints and
503 notices of non-compliance for violations of the Lead Disclosure Rule. In all EPA Civil Enforcement
reached the homes of 42,673 families.
o
S.
BS
5s
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-97
-------
OIG PROFILE OF PERFORMANCE
•/ Questioned Costs/Savings (millions) $67.2
/ Fines, Recoveries, Settlements (millions) $5.2
•/ Criminal, Civil, Administrative Actions 98
•/ Environmental Program Actions/Improvements 86
•/ Management Operational Actions Improvements 102
/ Customer Service Rating 80%
• Strengthening controls over access to sensitive
data on the Agency's mainframe computer.
• Operating a viable asbestos inspection program
to ensure that school districts comply with the
Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act.
In FY 2001 OIG audits and reviews recommended
improvements in the economy, efficiency, account-
ability and integrity of Agency program and operational
performance that accounted for over $67.2 million in
savings and questioned costs. For example, as recom-
mended by the OIG, North Carolina and EPAs south-
east region made significant changes to the state's
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
permits enforcement program to improve water quality
and public health.
EPAs OIG continued to emphasize an
investigative initiative to uncover criminal activity in
the awarding and delivery of assistance agreements
and contracts, and in laboratory fraud. The OIG
developed an initiative to instruct enforcement
officials from EPA and other agencies on performing
investigations of laboratory fraud, and how to
partner with other agencies to detect and prevent
government laboratory fraud that severely impacts
EPAs and other agencies' policy and enforcement
actions. Investigations and proactive reviews which
detected and prevented vulnerability to risk of
financial and environmental loss, and protected the
integrity of EPAs programs and operations, resulted
in over $5.2 million in fines and penalties and 98
criminal, civil and/or administrative actions. OIG
investigations consistently yielded significant monetary
and environmental results. For instance, a company
was found guilty of using false documents to hire
untrained workers for asbestos abatement, exposing
them and the public to severe health risks. The OIG
web site, http://www.epa.gov/oigearth, contains
information on OIG Semiannual Reports, its Strategic
Plan, and individual audit reports.
STATE AND TRIBAL PARTNER
CONTRIBUTIONS
In FY 2001 EPA has placed even greater emphasis
on improving the Agency's relations with states, tribes
and other federal agencies. EPAs Administrator
regularly spoke, both inside and outside the Agency,
on the importance of strengthening EPAs partner-
ship through the National Environmental Perfor-
mance Partnership System (NEPPS). EPAs
Administrator issued a major policy memo on
August 23, 2001, calling for senior Agency leadership
to advance the partnership through increasing the
Agency's flexibility for states to address the highest
priority environmental problems, working with the
states to improve performance measures, and
generally increasing the incentives for states to
practice results-based management under NEPPS.
During FY 2001 the Agency also solicited formal
input from EGOS and the Tribal Caucus on state and
tribal priorities for the EPA budget at the beginning
of its annual planning and budgeting process for
FY 2003. Representatives of both organizations
made presentations on their recommended priorities
for EPAs budget at the Agency's FY 2003 annual
planning meeting with senior management. These
recommendations were considered as part of the
budget decision-making process.
ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS OF FY 2001
PERFORMANCE ON FY 2002 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE PLAN
There are no changes to FY 2002 APGs based
on results of FY 2001 performance.
PERFORMANCE DATA CHART
The following performance data chart includes
performance results for the FY 2001 APGs that
support Goal 10. The performance chart reflects the
Agency's 1997 Strategic Plan goals and objectives
with which FY 2001 APGs are associated. Relevant
FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs are displayed for ease in
comparing performance. Data quality information
for Goal 10 can be found on pages B-38 to B-41 of
11-98 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Appendix B, "Data Quality." Additionally, the chart
presents results for FY 2000 and FY 1999 APGs for
which data were not available when the FY 2000
report was published, as well as for FY 2000 APGs
that are not associated with FY 2001 APGs.
Summary
Performance
Goal 10: Effective Management
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
FY1999-FY2001 Results
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.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: Vision and leadership, as well as executive direction and policy oversight for all Agency programs,
continue to be shown in the area of children's health. EPA ensures that it is a high priority to identify and assess environmental health and
safety risks that may disproportionately affect children. EPA, in recognition of the emerging need for assessment of Agency policies that
affect health risks faced by children, produced the Children's Health Valuation Handbook. The handbook is designed to assist EPA
economists in valuing benefits and costs of improving children's health. It offers practical guidance on economic issues that are both
important and unique to valuing children's health effects.
APG64
FY 2001
Planned
Actual
Evaluate the effectiveness of the Children's Valuation Handbook. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Evaluate an independent report on guidance.
FY 2000 Evaluate health outcomes related to environmental health effects for asthma and lead addressed
in 11 Pilot Child Health Champion Communities. Goal Met.
Performance Measure
- Issue report on health outcomes.
FY 2001 Result: The final evaluation report was issued on September 29, 2001. The handbook is intended to be a living document that is
revised periodically as new information becomes available and the Agency's needs evolve. When prospective users of the handbook were
interviewed, they found the handbook to be a very useful reference tool for laying out the issues that need to be considered in valuing
children's health.
EPA Will Provide the Management Services, Administrative Support and Facility Operations Necessary to
Achieve Its Environmental Mission and to Meet Its Fiduciary and Workforce Responsibilities.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: EPA's progress toward effective management and fiscal responsibilities is highlighted by quick
response to changing needs while maintaining the highest quality standards for resource stewardship and customer service. In critical
management areas such as security, higher federal standards for accountability and financial management, managing changing needs for
workforce skills, and keeping pace with new technology, EPA provided the management operations and customer service needed to
support Agency environmental results.
APG65
FY 2001
EPA strengthens goal-based decision making by developing and issuing timely planning
and resource management products that meet customer needs. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Agency's audited financial statements and Annual Report are submitted on time.
- Agency's audited financial statements receive an unqualified opinion and provide
information that is useful and relevant to the Agency and external parties.
Planned
3/01/01
1
Actual
3/01/01
1
FY2000 100 percent of EPA's Government Performance Results Act (GPRA) implementation components 85%
financial management, accountability, and program (planning, budgeting, analysis) are completed
on time and meet customer needs. Goal Not Met.
FY 1999 By the end of 1999, the Agency can plan and track performance against annual goals and 9/30/99
capture 100% of costs through the new Planning, Budgeting, Analysis, and Accountability structure,
based on modified budget and financial accounting systems, a new accountability process, and
new cost accounting mechanisms. Goal Met.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-99
-------
FY 2001 Result: EPA prepared and submitted, by the statutory March 1, 2001 due date, the FY 2000 financial statements and received a
clean audit opinion, o ensure future success, the Agency has strengthened its year-end process resulting in a timely close; developed new
procedures for grant accruals with DIG concurrence and prepared financial statements by Treasury fund symbol that were independently
reviewed and verified to assure their accuracy and reliability. In addition, the Agency is preparing the FY 2001 financial statements using
an automated reporting package, his package will ensure the Agency's financial statements are prepared more quickly and accurately and
will meet the more stringent February 1, 2003 due date for the FY 2002 Annual Report.
APG 66 Planned Actual
FY 2001 EPA continues improving how it measures progress in achieving its strategic objectives 4% 4%
and annual goals by increasing external performance goals and measures characterized
as outcomes by 4% in the FY 2002 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional
Justification. Goal Met.
FY 2001 Result: In FY 2001 EPA released the FY 2002 Annual Plan/Congressional Justification (CJ) document, which included 53 Annual
Performance Goals (APGs) and 105 annual Performance Measures (PMs) that were classified as outcomes. These outcome-oriented
APGs and PMs represent 29% of the total number of APGs and 29% of the total PMs in the document, and in turn constitute a 6% increase for
APGs and a 2% increase for PMs over the FY 2001 Annual Performance Plan/Congressional Justification, resulting in a simple average of an
overall 4% increase. The increase in outcome-based APGs is of greater significance than the increase in PMs because the APGs are the basis
for Agency accountability in Annual Reports and also encompass the PMs. In addition, further improvement efforts are reflected in the
FY 2002 Revised Annual Plan, in which APGs and PMs show improvements over the FY 2001 CJ of 7% and 3%, respectively.
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
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: EPA continued to make investments in state-of-the-art construction and infrastructure renovations
to its office facilities and laboratories to provide a safe and healthy, energy-efficient environment for employees and the surrounding
communities. These new facilities will significantly enhance the Agency's ability to conduct sound science and serve as a model for public
and private laboratories nationwide.
APG 67 Planned Actual
FY 2001 EPA will ensure personnel are relocated to new space as scheduled. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Percentage of EPA personnel consolidated into Headquarters complex 52% 52%
FY 2001 Result: The Agency conducted seven moves in FY 2001, relocating 665 employees to the Ariel Rios North building and the EPA
East (ICC) building.
APG 68 Planned Actual
FY 2001 EPA will ensure that all new and ongoing construction projects are progressing and
completed as scheduled. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Percentage of the new Research Triangle Park (RTP) building construction completed. 100% 95%
- Percentage of the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) building construction 100% 100%
completed.
FY 2000 EPA will ensure that all new and ongoing "construction projects are progressing and completed
as scheduled. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Percentage of new RTP building construction completed. 80%
- Percentage of the ICC construction completed. 80%
„ - Percentage of EPA personnel consolidated into Headquarters complex. 40%
|
OJ
S* FY 1999 Complete at least 50% of construction of the consolidated research lab at RTP, North Carolina. 60%
si Goal Met.
g
•3 Continue renovation of the new consolidated headquarters complex, completing 100% build 90%
Jj out of the Ariel Rios north and Wilson Building, and 50% of the ICC, and moving 50%
w 38% of EPA personnel from vacated spaces to the new consolidated complex. Goal Met. 31%
o
-5 FY 2001 Result: Facing a delay in construction, EPA and the General Services Administration changed its acceptance strategy from full,
£ one-time acceptance to partial acceptance in order to begin occupancy. As a result the Agency's occupancy schedule has not
11-100 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
experienced a delay and this performance measure is considered met. Through January 2002, 50% of the EPA-RTP workforce has been
moved into the building.
APG69
FY 2001
EPA will install a demonstration fuel cell at Ft. Meade Laboratory.
Performance Measures
- Percentage of fuel cell components in place.
Planned
10%
Actual
FY 2001 Result: The project was delayed due to circumstances beyond the Agency's control. Siemens-Westinghouse Power Corporation
had to reconfigure the proposed system to accommodate commercially available turbines. In March 2001 an Ohio electric utility and one
of the project's financing partners withdrew from the project. The project will proceed once additional funding is obtained.
EPA Will Provide Audit and Investigative Products and Services, All of Which Can Facilitate the
Accomplishment of Its Mission.
Progress Toward Strategic Objective: The DIG continues to make progress in providing audit and investigative products and services
that improve EPA's financial, operational, and program management.
APG70
FY 2001
Office of Audit provides independent audits, evaluations, and advisory services, responsive
to customers and clients, leading to improved economy, efficiency and effectiveness in
Agency business practices and attainment of its environment goals. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Potential monetary value of recommendations, questioned costs, savings and
recoveries.
- Examples of Office of Inspector General (OIG) recommendations/advice or actions
taken to improve the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of business practices and
environmental programs.
- Overall customer and stakeholder satisfaction with audit products and services
(timeliness, relevancy, usefulness and responsiveness).
Planned
$40 M
55
77%
Actual
$67.2 M
80
80%
FY 2000 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. Goal Met.
Performance Measures
- Potential monetary value of recommendations, questioned costs, savings and recoveries.
- Examples of OIG recommendations or actions taken to improve economy, efficiency, and
effectiveness.
- Overall, customer and stakeholder satisfaction with audit products and services.
$55.3 M
78
76%
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.
Goal Met.
24
Performance Measures
- Potential monetary value of recommendations, questioned costs, savings and recoveries.
- Examples of OIG recommendations or actions taken to improve economy, efficiency, and
effectiveness.
- Overall, customer and stakeholder satisfaction with audit products and services.
$128.8M
60
75%
FY 2001 Result: The OIG exceeded its annual performance goals of providing timely, independent auditing and consulting services
responsive to the needs of its customers that provide value to the Agency and recommendations to improve program and operational
performance and integrity.
o
S.
FY 2000 Annual Performance Goals (no longer reported for FY 2001)
All 58 mission-critical systems will continue to support core Agency functions without interruption across Year 2000 date change.
ea
5s
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Performance Results
11-101
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
11-102 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report tvtvtv.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Section III
Management
Accomplishments
and Challenges
-------
MANAGEMENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CHALLENGES
EPA senior managers are aware of the complex
management challenges the Agency must address to
achieve program results, and they work diligently to
identify strategies to maintain integrity and strengthen
the public's confidence in the Agency. The Agency
uses a system of internal program reviews,
independent reviews, and audits by the General
Accounting Office (GAO) and EPAs Office of the
Inspector General (OIG); program evaluations; and
performance measurements to ensure that program
activities are effectively carried out in accordance
with applicable laws and sound management policy
and to provide reasonable assurance that Agency
resources are protected against fraud, waste, abuse,
and mismanagement. As a result the EPA is quick to
identify and develop strategies to address integrity
weaknesses and major management challenges—
deficiencies in program policies, guidance, or
procedures that might impair the Agency's ability to
achieve its mission.
For some management problems the Agency has
put annual performance goals in place to track
progress. Currently, 3 of the 4 integrity material
weaknesses and 8 of the 13 management challenges
have associated Government Performance and
Results Act (GPRA) annual performance goals and
measures. Although EPA does not have specific
GPRA goals or measures for all integrity weaknesses
and major management challenges, the Agency's
senior leadership monitors all problems closely as
discussed later in this section.
Section III provides a comprehensive discussion
of EPA's management and performance challenges and
its 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 (Integrity Act); the Inspector General
Act of 1978, as amended; and the Reports
Consolidation Act of 2000, as discussed below
Under the Integrity Act 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 found to
impair achievement of agency missions—and identify
corrective action strategies that have been developed
and are under way to remedy the problems. EPA senior
managers periodically report to the Administrator on
progress to address material weaknesses and other less
serious but important problems.
FISCAL YEAR 2001
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.
Christine Todd Whitman
Administrator
The Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended,
requires 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. The
Reports Consolidation Act of 2000 gives agencies
the authority to consolidate various management
reports (including management's report on audits)
into a single annual report. EPA managers have
greatly improved the timeliness and effectiveness of
their audit management practices and have decreased
the number of audits without final action 1 year after
the management decision by 50 percent since
FY 1999 (from 72 in FY 1999 to 36 in FY 2001).
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.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Management Accomplishments and Challenges III-l
-------
FY 2001 INTEGRITY ACT REPORT
Since 1988 EPA has identified and reported
49 material weaknesses and 18 financial non-
conformances. By the end of FY 2001 EPA had
corrected 45 of the material weaknesses (92 percent)
and all 18 of the financial nonconformances. These
totals reflect the correction of one material weakness
in FY 2001: Deficiencies in Internal Employment
Discrimination Complaints Resolution Process Under
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The
Agency's corrective action strategy and determination
that this weakness had been resolved are discussed
below EPA will carry forward four material weaknesses
and no financial nonconformances. Planned corrective
actions and target completion dates for the carryover
material weaknesses are addressed below The progress
in correcting material weaknesses and financial
nonconformances exemplifies EPAs strong
commitment to improving integrity and accountability
in all programs, organizations, and functions.
MATERIAL WEAKNESS CORRECTED
DURING FY 2001
Deficiencies in Internal Employment
Discrimination Complaints Resolution Process
Under Title VII (Civil Rights Act of 1964)
(Goal 10): Tide VII requires that EPA implement and
manage an effective federal discrimination complaint
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 was 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 use the automated
data tracking system effectively; insufficient contractor
support to manage the investigation process; and a lack
of staff to handle the current inventory of 269
complaints.
Corrective Action Strategy: During FY 2001 a case
closure team that included representatives from EPAs
Office of Civil Rights (OCR), EPAs Office of General
Counsel, and the Regional Counsel's Office was
formed to reduce the backlog of Title VII complaints.
The team identified 139 complaints that had been
active and pending on OCR's docket for 180 days or
more as of June 2001. The team successfully resolved
most of the complaints, leaving 12 complaints requiting
completion of a draft report of investigation at the end
of FY 2001. EPA also hired additional permanent
staff for the Title VII team and implemented a new
contract and case tracking system to monitor the
complaint process. With the additional staff and
resources, the Agency can ensure the timely processing
of future Title VII discrimination complaints.
MATERIAL WEAKNESSES CARRIED OVER
INTO FY 2002
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. By June 2001 the number of
Titie VI administrative complaints that required an
investigation or a jurisdictional determination by EPA
had reached 66. EPAs program to investigate Title VI
complaints generally does not meet regulatory
deadlines for processing and investigating complaints.
Corrective Action Strategy: The EPA Administrator
autiiorized die creation of a task force to work fulltime
to eliminate die backlog of Titie VI complaints. When
die task force began its work in June 2001, 45 of these
complaints were still under review witii no decision
regarding whether the Agency would accept the
complaints for investigation, reject them for failure to
satisfy die criteria in EPAs Title VI regulations, or
refer them to another office or agency. The remaining
21 complaints had been accepted for investigation.
Approximately half of the complaints under review
were subject to an appropriation rider prohibiting EPA
from using FY 1999, 2000, or 2001 appropriated funds
to implement or administer die 1998 Interim Guidance
for Investigating Title VI Administrative Complaints
Challenging Permits until revised guidance was finalized.
In June 2000 EPA published draft revised Tide VT
guidance. By the end of FY 2001 the task force had
reduced the backlog by approximately 20 percent and
had taken action on all the cases under review tiiat
were not affected by the appropriation rider. The
appropriation rider was subsequentiy lifted in FY 2002.
EPA continues to process Titie VI complaints to
eliminate the backlog and to address new complaints
as received. Completion of corrective actions is
expected by June 2003.
III-2 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
2. Information System Security (Goal?): 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. (FY 1997—2002 OIG
major management challenge, FY 2001 GAO major management
challenge, declared a material weakness FY 1997 and an
expanded material weakness FY 2000.)
Corrective Action Strategy: EPA has made substantial
improvements in strengthening its information
security program by instituting a comprehensive
strategy that addresses all security-related deficiencies.
Corrective actions include improving the Agency's risk
assessment and planning process, implementing major
new technical and procedural controls, issuing new
policies, and beginning a regular process of testing and
evaluation. During FY 2001 EPA completed risk
assessments for security-critical applications and
systems, conducted training and awareness activities
for information security officers and senior managers,
and provided general awareness training for all Agency
employees. In addition, EPA installed network
intrusion-detection and monitoring controls on its
centrally managed environment and plans to install
additional tools on its distributed systems environment.
All corrective actions are expected to be completed by
the end of FY 2002. (Also see OIG's Major Management
Challenges Needing High-Eevel Agency Attention.)
3. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System Permits (Goal 2): During the 1990s the
backlog in EPA-issued major permits tripled, and the
backlog in state-issued permits doubled. Expired
NPDES permits might not reflect the most recent
applicable effluent guidelines, water quality standards,
or Total Maximum Daily Loads posing a threat to the
environment. Without timely issuance of high-quality
permits, necessary improvements in water quality might
be delayed. EPA headquarters and regional offices are
working together closely to track both Agency- and
state-issued permit efforts. (FY 1998-2002 OIG
Management Challenge, declared a material weakness FY 1998.)
Corrective Action Strategy: The Agency has made
substantial progress in implementing a process to
effectively reduce EPA's long-standing backlog in issuing
NPDES permits. EPA, in consultation with state
partners, developed and issued guidance—Approaches
for Reducing the NPDES Permit Backlog-^n. July 1999.
The guidance identifies four strategic objectives for
reducing the backlog: (1) understand and better define
the backlog, (2) examine permitting efficiencies and
facilitate programmatic and technical streamlining
opportunities, (3) provide funding and technical support
for regions and states, and (4) encourage regions and
states to share technical expertise and permitting tools. In
May 1999 the Agency established two target dates for
completion of corrective actions, one for individual
permits for major facilities and one for individual
permits for major and minor facilities combined. The
target for the major facilities was to have no more than
10 percent of the permits backlogged by the end of the
2001 calendaryear; the target for the combined major
and minor facilities is 10 percent by the end of the 2004
calendar year. The Agency is also working closely with
the regions to manage permit issuance efforts for both
EPA- and state-issued NPDES permits. A monthly
permit issuance/backlog trend report is distributed to
each EPA region and the Agency's stakeholders. In
addition, the Agency is examining strategies that will
focus attention on eliminating the permit backlogs that
have the most significant environmental impact.
Corrective actions are expected to be completed by
the end of FY 2005. (Also see OIG's Major Management
Challenges Needing High-Fjsvel Agency Attention.)
4. Construction Grants Closeout (Goal 2):
Without timely closeouts 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 1992 OMB
candidate material weakness, declared an Agency weakness
FY 1992, elevated to a material weakness FY 1996.)
Corrective Action Strategy: Since 1990 the Agency has
worked to accelerate the completion and closeout of
the construction grants by annually assessing the
remaining workload in each region, identifying the
bottlenecks, and agreeing on a closeout plan and
follow-up actions to bring the program to completion.
Success is defined as 10 or fewer pre-1992 projects
remaining to be closed out in a region, with no more
than 5 remaining in any state in the region. The
number of open grants has decreased from 5,860 in
1990 to 138 (pre-1992 grants) at the end of FY 2001,
and it is projected to be approximately 68 by the end
of FY 2002. Five regions had achieved success by the
end of FY 2001, and the remaining regions will be
monitored closely to ensure that they can achieve
success by the end of FY 2002. Corrective actions are
expected to be completed by the end of FY 2002.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
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 13 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. Eight of the 13 major management
challenges are linked to GPRA goals and measures,
and 10 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): Under the National Environmental
Performance Partnership System (NEPPS), EPA
committed to long-term collaboration with state
agencies to improve Agency and state management
of national environmental programs. (FY 1999—2001
GAO major management challenge; FY 2000—2002 OIG
major management challenge.)
Corrective Action Strategy: The EPA Administrator
considers improving the Agency's relations with
states, tribes, and other federal agencies a high
priority. In an August 2001 policy memorandum, the
Administrator called for senior Agency leadership to
advance the partnership through increasing the
Agency's flexibility for states to address the highest
priority environmental problems, working with the
states to improve performance measures, and
generally increasing the incentives for states to
improve results-based management under the
Performance Partnership System. The Agency is also
developing tools that state and EPA regional NEPPS
negotiators can use to clarify the appropriate
performance expectations. In addition EPA and the
Environmental Council of the States (EGOS) have
an active joint workgroup to address continuing
implementation issues and work to identify and
remove remaining barriers to effective
implementation of the Performance Partnership
System. (Also see OIG's Major Management Challenges
Needing High-Level Agency Attention.)
2. Protecting Infrastructure from Nontraditional
Attacks (Goal 2): Presidential Decision Directive
(FDD) 63, initiated in May 1998, assigned EPA as the
designated Lead Agency and Sector Liaison for the
Nation's water systems. To meet the requirements of
PDD 63, EPA needs to work with private sector
representatives to complete a national framework for
protecting the critical infrastructure of the Nation's
water systems from terrorist attack, conduct
vulnerability assessments and risk mitigation, and
implement a Vulnerability Awareness and Education
Program for the water sector. (FY 2002 OIG major
management challenged)
Corrective Action Strategy: The Agency is playing a
significant role in protecting the public from terrorist
attempts to endanger drinking water supplies. Agency
activities in FY 2000 and FY 2001 were designed to
initiate development of the materials, tools, and
training needed for drinking water systems to
conduct vulnerability assessments and to begin
development of a secure Information Sharing and
Analysis Center (ISAC), which will allow drinking
water utilities to share threat information with the
Federal Bureau of Investigation and other utilities. In
response to the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001, the Agency established a Water Protection Task
Force to implement PDD 63 and other related
activities. In FY 2002 the Agency will continue the
development of ISAC, test and modify the
vulnerability assessment tool, support the
implementation of vulnerability assessments by the
360 largest public water systems nationwide, develop
and disseminate guidance for emergency response
plans, and train water system operators in the
application of vulnerability assessments and remedial
plans. These activities are being funded through
$83 million in an FY 2002 supplemental
appropriation for EPA. In addition, the Agency will
make grants to states for counterterrorism
coordinators to work with EPA and drinking water
utilities to implement counterterrorism activities.
(Also see OIG's, Major Management Challenges Needing
High-Level Agency Attention.)
3. Clean Water Act Section 305(b) (Goal 2): EPA
needs to improve the quality of water data collected
from the states every 2 years under section 305(b) of
the Clean Water Act. Water quality monitoring data
has long been recognized as the foundation upon
which EPA and state water quality management
decisions are made. These include decisions ranging
from developing state water quality standards,
III-4
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
assessing attainment with standards, identifying waters
not meeting standards, calculating total maximum daily
loads (TMDL), developing NPDES discharge limits
and targeting nonpoint source controls. Numerous
independent reports have cited that weaknesses in
monitoring programs undermine states' ability to
support water quality decisions with confidence. Over
the past 10 to 15 years, state water quality monitoring
programs have dwindled in scope and quality while the
need for high-quality data has become more critical.
EPA needs to consider all possible approaches, from
requiring states to collect and report useful data to
eliminating the 305 (b) report and relying instead on data
and models from the U.S. Geological Survey and
others. (FY2001 QMB candidate material weakness, declared
as internal Agency weakness FY 2001.)
Corrective Action Strategy: EPA is working with states
and other stakeholders to improve the
comprehensiveness of state monitoring programs,
the inclusiveness of data collection and reporting
under section 305(b), the quality of state data in
making water quality management decisions, and the
development of a comprehensive information
management architecture. The Agency is ready to
issue final guidance that will provide a framework for
states and EPA to collaborate in developing a
strategy and timeline for upgrading state monitoring
programs. In addition, the Agency is working with
the states on technical guidance that will describe
what the states need to consider in the collection of
data to make water quality standards attainment
decisions for both section 305(b) and section 303(d)
purposes. EPA is developing a new report
consolidating 305(b) and 303(d) requirements and
expects full implementation during the states' 2004
reporting cycle. The consolidated report will ensure
that either all waters are being monitored or waters
that are not monitored have plans to correct this
deficiency. Corrective actions are expected to be
completed by the end of FY 2004.
4. Safe Drinking Water Information System
(SDWIS) (Goal 2): The Safe Drinking Water
Information System (SDWIS) is the Nation's best
source of national compliance information on all
Safe Drinking Water Act requirements. It provides
the critical database for such efforts as Annual
Compliance Reports, Drinking Water Consumer
Confidence Reports, development of regulations,
trends analyses, and public information. 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 developed a Data
Reliability Action Plan in 1999 as a multistep
approach to improve the 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. In
FY 2001 EPA, in partnership with states and major
stakeholders, developed an information strategy to
make several additional improvements to SDWIS.
These additional activities address the totality of
issues related to the quality and accuracy of SDWIS,
and as a result they will extend the target corrective
action date. Completion of corrective actions is
expected by the end of FY 2004.
5. 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 RCRA. To address the
problem, GAO recommended that EPA devise a
strategy for ensuring that cleanup managers in EPA's
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.)
y: EPA has already under-
taken a number of regulatory, guidance, and over-
sight 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 three new results-oriented cleanup
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Management Accomplishments and Challenges III-5
-------
guidances expected to be issued early in FY 2001 was
delayed because of the need to address comments
and make decisions on key issues, such as
maintaining the ability to require corrective action
under 3008(h) RCRA authorities. Completion of
corrective actions is expected by FY 2002.
6. Data Management Practices (Goal 7): EPA
needs to improve the management,
comprehensiveness, consistency, reliability, and
accuracy of its data to help better measure
performance and achieve environmental results. In
addition, the Agency needs to develop error
detection processes to ensure that errors in its
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 and OIG major management
challenge; FY 2000 and 2001 GAO major management
challenge; FY 2000—2002 OIG major management
challenge; Information ^sources Management (IRM) data
management declared an Agency weakness FY 1994; scope of
weakness expanded FY 2000; and target correction date
extended to FY'2004.)
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. The Agency completed promulgation of six
key data standards and their rules for implementation
in FY 2001. The Environmental Data Standards
Council developed four additional key data standards
in the areas of permitting, enforcement and
compliance, water quality monitoring, and tribal
identifiers and expects to implement them during
FY 2002. The Agency is also working to expand
implementation of its Integrated Error Correction
Process, which provides an effective feedback
mechanism for reporting and resolving errors
identified by the public on EPA web sites. From May
2000 to September 2001, EPA received 987 alleged
errors and resolved 650 of them; the remainder are
still under review EPA has completed major
components of a data architecture to support cross-
organizational activities and has begun to develop a
formal data architecture document that it expects to
complete by May 2002. The Agency expects to fully
implement the Central Data Exchange to improve
reporting of environmental information by the
regulated community and states to EPA by
March 2004. The Agency also expects to complete
development of a strategic plan for addressing data
gaps by December 2002. The Agency anticipates that
all corrective actions will be completed by the end of
FY 2004. (Also see QIC's Major Management Challenges
Needing High-Level Agency Attention.)
7. 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 1999-2002 OIG major management challenge, declared
an internal Agency weakness FY 2000.)
Corrective Action Strategy: EPA completed
independent technical reviews of its laboratories in
FY 2001 to assess the Agency's ability to produce
data of known and documented quality. The Agency
is currently assessing draft review reports and
proposed corrective action plans submitted by
reviewed organizations. Other ongoing activities
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) 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 are 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 QIC's Major
Management Challenges Needing High-Level Agency
Attention.)
8. Results-Based Information Technology
Project Management (Goal 7): EPA needs a
comprehensive approach to information technology
(IT) capital investment planning and a disciplined
budget process for managing its assets to meet
III-6
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
programmatic objectives. In addition the Agency needs
to ensure that IT projects are timely, cost-effective, and
results-based. (FY 2001—2002 OIG major management
challenge, declared an internal Agency weakness FY 2001.)
Corrective Action Strategy: EPA is taking a
comprehensive and systematic approach to develop
an appropriate strategy to better manage its IT
investments. This strategy consists of four overall
goals: (1) automate the Agency's capital planning and
investment control (CPIC) process by deploying the
Information Technology Investment Portfolio
System (I-TIPS), (2) develop a complete investment
portfolio aligned with the Agency's technology
architecture, (3) improve proposal quality and
analysis, and (4) establish efficiencies with other
Agency management processes. The Agency
anticipates that all corrective actions will be
completed by FY 2004. (Also see 0/G's Major
Management Challenges Needing High-Level Agency
Attention.)
9. Science to Achieve Results Grants and
Fellowships (STAR Program) (Goal 8): OMB
believes that EPA needs to assess the outcomes of
the research completed under the STAR Program
and evaluate the benefits of the program to EPA in
meeting its mission. OMB also believes that EPA
needs performance measures to determine whether
the STAR Program is contributing value to the
Agency in meeting its priorities. (FY 2001 OMB
candidate material weakness.)
Corrective Action Strategy: EPA's STAR Program
focuses on research questions that are applied and
require intermediate or longer time frames to
address, or are a part of the Agency's research and
development core program designed to provide the
scientific basis for questions to be dealt with in the
future. By the time a research grant is completed,
there might be immediate practical applications;
more often, it takes longer to determine the best use
of research results. During FY 2001 the Agency's
Science Advisory Board (SAB) conducted a review
of the results of the Water and Watersheds
component of the STAR Program. The Panel
strongly recommended the STAR Water and
Watersheds be retained as a major focused program
within EPA. EPA is implementing the SAB
recommendations from the report to ensure that the
research results will be used effectively. In FY 2002 the
SAB will review components of the STAR Particulate
Matter Program. A contract with the National
Academy of Sciences (NAS) was awarded in
September 2001 to review up to four additional areas
of STAR research. NAS will also help to develop
criteria for EPA to use in future evaluations of the
STAR Program. EPA will continue to work with the
NAS and SAB to implement the recommendations of
these reviews and plan additional reviews of STAR, as
appropriate.
10. 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: The Agency is 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, to
improve the quality and comprehensiveness of the
data, and to reduce the transaction costs for state
users. Initiatives under way include the
modernization of PCS to better address
requirements of the NPDES permitting and
enforcement programs and to meet new initiatives
such as tracking reduced pollutant loadings, capturing
information on storm water sources, and assessing
the health of watersheds. The modernized PCS will
include Electronic Data Interchange, which will allow
EPA to access state data and will take into account
increased public access to data and standardization
of systems and data. In addition, the Agency is
working with the states to improve the transfer of
data into PCS via an Interim Data Exchange Format
(IDEF) that will ultimately simplify the transition to
the new modernized PCS. EPA is also proposing the
Cross Media Electronic Reporting and Record-
keeping Rule to address electronic reporting
requirements for the NPDES Program. The cross
media rule was published in the Federal Register on
August 31, 2001, and the Agency expects to
promulgate the final rule by the first quarter of
FY 2003. Completion of corrective actions is
expected by the end of FY 2003.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Management Accomplishments and Challenges III-7
-------
11. Linking Mission and Management (Goal 10):
EPA's OIG believes the Agency needs to improve its
planning, measuring, and accountability by involving
its partners in goal and priority setting, linking output
and outcome measures of results to its goals, and
accounting for the costs of achieving those results.
In addition, EPA needs to accumulate, report, link,
and use environmental information on activities and
outcomes as a basis for determining environmental
return on investment, sound resource decisions, and
accountability to the public. (OIG major management
challenge for FY 2002, combining FY 2001 management
challenges on accountability and managerial accounting.)
Corrective Action Strategy: EPA has made significant
progress over the past year in linking the management
of the Agency's resources to its mission and
environmental and human health results through the
following activities:
• Involved EPA's state partners in the annual
planning and budgeting process by considering
state priorities along with EPA headquarters and
regional priorities, and consulting with the states
at appropriate times during the budget
development and appropriations process.
• Developed more outcome-oriented annual
performance goals and measures. In August 2001
the Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO) awarded contractor support to program
offices for projects geared specifically toward
improving annual performance goals and
performance measures. In addition, EPA's
FY 2002 Final Annual Performance Plan/
Congressional Justification, issued in August
2001, includes 6 percent more outcome-based
goals than the FY 2000 Final Plan.
• Improved EPA's annual report to make it more
relevant to Agency decision makers. The
Agency's Fiscal Year 2001 Annual Report
emphasizes environmental results and the impact
of how Agency activities programs on protecting
human health and the environment as well as the
benefit to the public.
• In August 2001 formed the Managing for
Improved Results Steering Group, comprising
senior managers from across the Agency. The
steering group is working to develop options and
recommendations for the Deputy Administrator
on short- and long-term reforms to EPA's strategic
planning, priority-setting, budgeting, and
accountability structures and processes. This effort
focuses on significant, far-reaching reforms to
national processes and systems as well as incremental
changes and smaller-scale improvements that can be
implemented immediately.
In addition, EPA continued its outreach efforts to
inform Agency managers on the benefits and uses of
cost information and worked with individual program
offices to develop further cost accounting applications
to enhance program management. The Agency met
specific program needs in such diverse areas as user
fees, Superfund cost recovery and the Working Capital
Fund (WCF).
OCFO developed cost accounting reports to
better manage critical activities and programs. For
example, the Agency now produces Cost by Output,
Superfund Site Specific, Superfund Remedial Action,
and WCF Revenue and Expense reports. Many of
these reports bring together financial, administrative,
and program information from different systems and
reports. This was made possible through the OCFO's
financial data warehouse and reporting tools which
integrate portions of "mixed" administrative
management systems (e.g., grants and contracts data)
with the core financial system. As a result of this
integration the Agency has expanded the range of
cost information available to program managers and
is better able to support decision-making based on
costs and results. OCFO is continuing to partner
with Agency offices to meet current needs and
identify future applications.
The Agency recognizes that challenges remain in
better linking assessments of program performance
with resource decisions and in identifying goals and
measures that better reflect its state partners' goals
and priorities and will allow for trends analyses over
time. However, EPA made significant progress in
FY 2001 and will continue to work diligently toward
improving its ability to link its mission and
management. (Also see OIG's Major Management
Challenges Needing High-Level Agency Attention.)
12. 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'2000and2002'OIGmajor
III-8 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
management challenge; grants ckseout and oversight of assistance
agreements was declared a material weakness in FY 1996,
reported 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: During FY 2001 EPA
conducted a review to validate the effectiveness of its
post-award management policies. The study found
that the Agency has made considerable progress in
post-award management but that further
improvement is needed. In FY 2002 EPA will
consolidate all existing post-award management
policies into a single, streamlined policy. In addition,
EPA will continue to review quarterly reports and
information from the Grantee Compliance Database
and evaluate post-award monitoring plans.
Completion of corrective actions is expected by
FY 2002. (Also see OIG's Major Management Challenges
Needing High-Level Agency Attention.)
13. 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 long-term steps needed to begin
addressing this issue. (FY 1998-2002 OIG major
management challenge, FY 2000—-2001 GAO major
management challenge, declared an internal Agency weakness
FY'2000.)
Corrective Action Strategy: EPA developed a
comprehensive approach for investing in and
managing the Agency's human resources. During
FY 2001 the Agency began to aggressively
implement its Human Capital Strategic Plan.
Additional resources will be dedicated to this effort
in FY 2002. As part of this plan, the Agency initiated
development of a competency-based workforce
planning model in FY 2001. Contractor support to
develop this model will begin in FY 2002. Specific
accomplishments in FY 2001 include (1) graduating
the second class of interns and hiring a fourth class;
(2) launching the Senior Executive Service (SES)
Candidate Development Program, with 50 candidates
to be selected for the program in FY 2002;
(3) developing and launching a new course for
supervisors and managers that new supervisors will be
required to take within the first 90 days of becoming a
supervisor; and (4) beginning the rollout of five
courses created as part of the Mid-Level Development
Program. Completion of corrective actions is expected
by FY 2004. (Also see OIG's Major Management Challenges
Needing High-Level Agency Attention.)
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Management Accomplishments and Challenges III-9
-------
FY 2001 MANAGEMENT'S REPORT ON AUDITS
EPA continues to make progress in reducing the
number of audits without final corrective action as
well as in strengthening its audit management practices
Agency-wide. In FY 2001 EPA was responsible for
addressing the OIG's recommendations and tracking
follow-up activities on 470 audits. During the fiscal
year the Agency achieved final action on 190 audits.
In addition, to improve its efficiency in managing
its audit follow-up activities, the Agency implemented
a new Web-based system for tracking and monitoring
audit reports. Since implementing the new system in
May 2001 EPA has continued to work with the OIG
to emphasize the importance of the quality of data
shared between EPAs and the OIG's tracking systems
and effective audit management practices.
Following is a summary of the Agency's audit
management activities for FY 2001.
Final Corrective Action Taken: EPA completed
final corrective action on 22 performance audits and
168 financial audits. Of the!68 financial audits, the
OIG questioned costs of more than $159.4 million.
After careful review, the OIG and the Agency
together agreed to disallow $57.3 million of these
questioned costs. For this period, EPA management
and the OIG did not identify audits for which
resources could be better utilized (i.e., funds put to
better use) based on findings in a performance audit.
Final Corrective Action Not Taken: As of
September 30, 2001, 134 audits were without final
action (excluding those audits with management
decisions under administrative appeal by the grantee).
Of these 134 audits, EPA officials had not completed
final action on 36 audits (27 percent) within 1 year
after the management decision.
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, 2001,
there were 66 management decisions in administrative
appeal status.
Audits Pending Final Corrective Action Beyond
1 Year: Because of the complexity of the issues, it
often takes Agency management longer than 1 year
after management decisions are reached with the
OIG to complete corrective action on audits.
Beginning October 1, 2001, management will track
36 audits with outstanding corrective actions after
the 1-year period. These audits are categorized by
three types: Program Performance (21), Assistance
Agreements (13), and Single Audits (2). These audits
are discussed below by category and identified by
title and responsible office. Additional information
on these audits is available, upon request, from the
OCFO's Audit Management Team (202-564-3633).
Audits of Program Performance: Final action for
program performance audits occurs when all
corrective actions have been implemented. This may
take longer than 1 year when corrections are complex
and lengthy. These include audits of EPA's financial
statements. EPA is tracking 21 audits in this category.
Administrator's Office:
601301 Environmental Education
P00213 NAMC
Office of Prevention, Pesticides & Toxic Substances:
101378 Pesticides Inerts
304030 Pesticides Banned (follow-up)
401205 Pesticides Theme Report
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response:
701114 Audit of RCRA Hazardous Waste Data
701132 Lab Data Quality - Federal Facilities
801090 Replacement Housing
801234 Audit of Deferrals to State
Office of Enforcement & Compliance Assurance:
P00018 Multimedia Enforcement
Office of the Chief Financial Officer:
P00004 IAG Deobligation
100288 FY98 Financial Statement
601200 FY95 Financial Statement - Superfund
Office of Environmental Information:
501240 PCIE Application Maintenance
801240 Field Sampling Capping Report
Office of Water:
701142 Animal Waste Disposal Issues
701223 Mining Financial Assurance
Office of Research and Development
P00015 Narragansett
Region 9:
803004 Physical Environment
Region 10:
801252 Region X LANS
P00012 Hanford's Tank Waste Remediation System Program
111-10 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Audits of Assistance Agreements: Final action for
assistance agreement audits can take longer than a
year as the grantee may appeal, refuse to repay, or be
placed on a repayment plan that spans several years.
The Agency's Audit Follow-Up Coordinators are
tracking 13 audits with financial or associated
corrective actions taking longer than 1 year to
complete.
Office of Enforcement & Compliance Assurance:
200207 Center for Environmental Commerce Eng.
Office of Grants and Debarment:
100006 FY 94 Report (HHS OIG)
100011 IAG Audit Report
100025 IAG Audit Report
100191 HHS-IAG-97
Region 1:
100189 Berlin
Region 2:
201241 Moodna Basin NY
100017 Landis SA
Region 3:
102023 Bath County Service Auth VA
200009 Baltimore City
Region 5:
103115 Galion, OH
104047 Indianapolis, IN
304038 Flint, MI
Single Audits: Final action for single audits occurs
when nonmonetary compliance actions are
completed. This 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. Single audits are conducted of
nonprofit organizations, universities, and state and
local governments. EPA is tracking completion of
corrective action on two single audits for the period
beginning April 1, 2001.
Region 9:
805053 Colorado River Indian Tribes, AZ
805059 Colorado River Indian Tribes, AZ
DISALLOWED COSTS AND FUNDS PUT TO BETTER USE
Category
Audits with management decisions but without
final action at the beginning of FY 2001 a
Audits for which management decisions were
reached in FY 2001
Total audits pending final action during FY 2001
Final action taken during FY 2001 :
(i) Recoveries
(a) Offsets
(b) Collection
(c) Value of Property
(d) Other
(ii) 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 2001
Disallowed Cost
(Financial Audits)
Number
120
152
272
168
104
Value
$163,878,871
$46,977,449
$210,856,320
$57,395,835
$18,545,264
$6,720,316
$0
$3,656,096
$24,465,513
$4,008,646
$153,460,485
Better Use
(Performance Audits)
Number
30
22
52
22
30
Value
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
a Differences in number of reports and amounts of disallowed costs and funds put to better use between this report and EPA's
previous annual report result from adjustments made between the old and new management audit tracking systems.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Management Accomplishments and Challenges III-ll
-------
MAJOR MANAGEMENT CLALLENGES NEEDING HIGH-LEVEL AGENCY ATTENTION
(Prepared by EPA's Office of the Inspector General)
LINKING MISSION TO MANAGEMENT
EPA can be viewed as a business that must
endeavor to deliver high-quality products and
services—improved environmental and human
health protection—to its customers at a reasonable
cost. Over the years, we have recommended to EPA
a number of improvements to enhance
accountability for the resources it spends.
The Agency has established a framework for
"results-based management" by setting long-term
goals and objectives, with strategies for achieving
them; setting annual goals and measures linked to
EPA's budget request; tracking progress annually and
over the long term; and using the results to adjust the
Agency's goal setting and strategy development.
However, EPA needs to improve its planning,
measuring, and accountability by involving its
partners in goal and priority setting, linking output
and outcome measures to its goals, and accounting
for the cost of achieving those results.
EPA's strategic planning and budget architecture
is organized around 10 separate strategic goals that
do not generally address overlapping environmental
issues or the needs and priorities of EPA's regions
and its state partners, which implement the majority
of the Agency's programs. The Agency needs to
strengthen its efforts to ensure that regional and state
priorities and goals are considered when setting its
national goals, defining meaningful measures, and
accounting for costs and performance.
To tell EPA's story of performance in relationship
to its goals, the Agency must develop more outcome-
based strategic and annual targets with its partners.
When EPA merged the budget and the Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA) process, it
adopted a set of goals and measures that reflected
each aspect of the Agency's budget. The Agency has
output data on activities but has few environmental
performance goals and measures and little data that
support its ability to measure environmental outcomes
and impacts. EPA's reliance on output measures has
made it difficult to provide the regions and states the
flexibility to direct their resources to what they
consider to be the activities with the highest payoff, as
well as to assess the impact of the Agency's work on
human health and the environment. Better
performance measurement and financial accountability
can be achieved through clearly linked, meaningful
performance measures with defined environmental
outcome goals. To be accountable EPA and its
partners need to capture and report environmental
and human health results information in a meaningful,
timely manner.
As a result of EPA's integration of its budget and
accounting structure with the GPRA strategic
architecture, the Agency accounts for all costs by
goal and objective. However, more needs to be done
to improve EPA's cost accounting system and
processes so that Agency managers have useful,
consistent, timely, and reliable information on the
cost of carrying out EPA's programs. It is also critical
that EPA report in a timely manner the full costs of
its outcome results, outputs, and activities. In
addition, EPA managers might need and want other
types of cost information beyond cost per output.
OCFO should lead an effort to determine what
other types of cost information may be useful to
Agency managers. Once these needs have been
determined, OCFO should then develop other
meaningful cost measures. Congress and federal
executives may find this cost information useful in
making decisions about allocating resources,
authorizing and modifying programs, and evaluating
performance.
Over the past 2 years, the Agency has taken
several steps to improve its ability to manage for
results and account for its resources. In August 2001
the Deputy Administrator charged OCFO with
convening a Managing for Improved Results Steering
Group, composed of senior leaders from across the
Agency. The Steering Group is examining EPA's
strategic planning, priority-setting, budgeting, and
accountability structures and processes to identify
potential improvements and to develop a change
strategy that will operate on two fronts:
(1) identifying options for significant, far-reaching
reforms to national processes and systems and
(2) pursuing incremental changes and smaller scale
improvements that can be effected immediately.
111-12 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Although the Agency has taken a number of
actions, we believe much remains to be done.
Overall, EPA needs a comprehensive system to
accumulate, report, link, and use environmental
information on activities and outcomes, as a basis for
determining environmental return on investment,
sound resource decisions, and accountability. EPA
has started developing the process for linking costs
to goals but now must follow through by working
with its regional offices and state and federal partners
in developing appropriate outcome measures and
accounting systems that track environmental and
human health results across the Agency's goals. This
information must then become an integral part of
the decision-making process of EPAs senior
management.
INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
Information Resources Management (IRM)
covers a broad area of interrelated activities,
including fundamental concepts such as using
enterprise and data architecture strategies to guide
the integration and management of data;
implementing data standards to facilitate data
sharing; and establishing quality assurance practices
to improve the reliability, accuracy, and scientific
basis of environmental data. Industry is identifying
strategically important data as an enterprise or
corporate asset and is spending significant amounts
of money to collect and manage such data. Audits of
EPA programmatic areas often have a component
relating to environmental data information systems,
and we frequently find deficiencies in these systems.
Today most states have developed environmental
programs with their own supporting information
systems, based on their own needs. Moreover, EPA
and the states often apply different data definitions
within these information systems and sometimes
collect and input different data. The result has been
that states and EPA report inconsistent data,
incomplete data, or obsolete data.
The Agency is moving in the right direction, but
many components that influence the effectiveness of
a data management program still need to be fully
addressed. During recent years the Agency has
specifically targeted various components, but
developing a robust data management program has
proven to be a complex and elusive effort. As a
result, corrective action dates have been extended
several times since this Agency-wide problem was
first reported in 1994.
To date, several areas remain to be completed.
For example, the Agency has yet to implement a
1998, agreed-upon OIG recommendation to
formally revise its policies and procedures to support
an Agency standards program. Also, over a 2V^-year
period, EPA developed and formally approved six
data standards; however, management estimates that
these standards will not be implemented in the
Agency's major environmental systems until the end
of FY 2003. EPA also continues to work with the
Environmental Council of States to identify and
develop additional data standards. Experience
suggests that the overall process needs to move
forward in a more timely and structured manner. To
its credit, EPA also has developed a Facility Registry
System and several metadata registries—the
Environmental Data Registry, Chemical Registry
System, Biology Registry System, Substance Registry
System, and Terminology Reference System.
Additionally, EPA expects to adopt four new data
standards in FY 2002 in the areas of Permitting,
Enforcement and Compliance, Water Quality
Monitoring, and Tribal Identifiers.
The Assistant Administrator for Environmental
Information is responsible for developing and
maintaining a strategic information resources
management plan. However, EPA has not revised its
outdated information technology strategy or fully
developed an Enterprise Architecture Plan to address
the integration and management of its environmental
data to support the Agency's strategic goals. The
informal target date for completing EPAs target
Enterprise Architecture is September 2002.
Data reliability is another major aspect of data
management that needs further attention. Recent
audits indicate that systems used by EPAs
Enforcement, Superfund, and Water programs have
inconsistent, incomplete, and obsolete data. Ongoing
audit work indicates that data in two major Agency
systems contain significant error rates in crucial data
fields. For example, more than 85 percent of the
cases reviewed in EPAs National Enforcement
Docket System contained errors in at least one key
field. Many of these data fields were congressionally
reported and used to track environmental progress
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Management Accomplishments and Challenges 111-13
-------
on GPRA goals and measures. The Agency has taken
significant steps to be responsive to data quality
concerns by instituting an Integrated Error
Correction Process, which provides an effective
feedback mechanism for reporting and resolving
errors identified by the public on EPA web sites.
From May 2000 to September 2001, EPA received
987 alleged errors and resolved 650 of them. The
rest are under review by EPA and state analysts.
Moreover, although the Agency recognizes and is
trying to address such data accuracy problems, it has
not developed a strategic plan to address the fact that
managers might not have the right environmental
data to make sound decisions. This year EPA began
developing a Data and Information Quality Strategic
Plan to prioritize recommendations for improving
the quality of currently collected data. The draft plan,
however, does not include a methodology to address
the long-recognized problem of data gaps.
As a result of these shortcomings, it is unlikely
that EPA will have the foundation it needs to share
comparable information, monitor environmental
activities, or compare progress across the Nation.
Moreover, EPAs ability to enforce environmental
laws and 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. EPA needs to continue its efforts to identify
what data are necessary to manage its programs and
needs to work with its partners to ensure that such
information is captured and reported in a timely,
accurate, and consistent manner.
RESULTS-BASED INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Six years after the Clinger-Cohen Act introduced
new requirements for managing information technology
(IT) investments, it is apparent that EPA still has much
to accomplish in planning for and developing an IT
infrastructure to manage an integrated investment
portfolio approach for environmental information.
Specifically, EPAs strategic IT plan is 7 years old and
does not reflect the current needs of the Agency,
much less the requirements of the Act.
The Clinger-Cohen Act intended a central
process with a Chief Information Officer (CIO) to
manage IT investments across the Agency. Since
enactment of the Act, EPA has taken two significant
actions. In 1998 the Agency established the CIO
position and assigned responsibility for establishing
an IT Architecture and an IT Capital Portfolio
Investment Control (CPIC) process. Then, in 1999
EPA reorganized its IT management structure and
established a Quality Information Council to
coordinate IT investments across the programs.
Although these two actions were meant to bring
about changes in the way EPA manages its IT
investments, IT project management continues as it
did before the CIO position was established and
significant gaps exist in the way IT investments are
proposed, reviewed, funded, and managed.
For example, we have significant concerns
regarding the effectiveness of EPAs current
management structure, the consistency of its IT
investment process, and the Agency's inability to
track IT development and implementation effectively.
Our concerns regarding the lack of IT project
management at EPA were echoed in a special report,
Federal Agency Compliance with the Clinger-Cohen Act,
issued by the Senate Governmental Affairs
Committee in October 2000. EPA has attempted to
address these problems, but after 5 years has yet to
propose a final project management process for IT
capital investments for OMB reporting purposes.
Further, the IT CPIC process needed for
managing and monitoring IT projects continues to
evolve slowly, year after year, with no established
completion date. In addition, the Agency's IT policies
are outdated and do not implement the Act's
requirements. Therefore, managers are not urged to
follow new procedures. After 6 years, the Chief
Financial Officer has just enacted an OIG
recommendation to establish an IT project cost
accounting methodology. We have concluded that
EPA has an evolving, decentralized, and
unmonitored approach to integrating information
using existing IT projects, which in themselves have
not developed or implemented minimal project
management controls.
These weaknesses have significant ramifications
because EPA reported approximately $398 million in
fiscal 2000 investments and planned investments of
$428 million for FY 2001. In March 2001 the Agency
also reported that it expects to spend at least
$449 million in FY 2002. In addition, a recent OMB
111-14 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
"report card" concluded that 61 percent of EPA's
FY 2002 IT Investment Portfolio was at high risk of
failure. OMB reached this opinion primarily because
it could not tell whether or how the Agency was
using an enterprise architecture approach to assess
and manage IT development, modernization, and
enhancement projects.
To facilitate improvements in environmental
protection, EPA must provide environmental
information to its diverse stakeholders. To achieve
that goal, EPA needs to update its IT strategic plan
to address the Agency's programmatic and
operational goals, complete developing a common
Agency IT architecture for IT projects, and establish
a CPIC process that supports program needs such as
environmental data standards, geographic
information, and electronic reporting.
EMPLOYEE COMPETENCIES
The Agency recognizes that one of its biggest
challenges over the next several years is the creation
and implementation of a workforce planning strategy
that focuses its attention and resources on employee
development. EPA needs to better integrate human
capital into its strategic plans by more effectively
defining and developing needed competencies in
leadership, management, science, and technical skills.
Appropriate training for staff, including supervisors
and managers, is critical to the credibility of EPA's
actions in accomplishing its environmental mission.
The need for training is highlighted in a number of
our audit reports and in reviews by GAO and the
National Research Council of the National Academies.
Specifically, an audit of the Superfund program
disclosed 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. We also found
that EPA employees in the hazardous waste program
needed more rigorous training to calculate proposed
penalties against violating facilities. As a third
example, our review of the National Environmental
Performance Partnership System (NEPPS)
concluded that a lack of training for EPA employees
has hindered the effective implementation of this
program. Audits have repeatedly noted a need to
better train managers in their oversight and
administration of EPA's assistance agreements
programs. Additionally, we found that EPA has not
required, nor regularly provided, specific training for
its managers or executives to lead a results- and
accountability-oriented culture.
In an audit on Region 6's Supplemental
Environmental Projects (SEPs), we found that the
region did not effectively implement the SEP policy
to ensure that EPA, the environment, and public
health were the primary beneficiaries of such
projects. Better training in SEP procedures and
methods, improved controls and guidance in
evaluating project quality and monitoring SEP
implementation, and more effective coordination
with the Justice Department would have improved
the region's implementation of SEP policy.
EPA recognized the need for broader
management, leadership, and technical skills in its
Workforce Assessment Project report, which discussed
the implications of future changes in EPA's mission
and role in environmental protection. The study
identified competency gaps that the Agency must
close to ensure that its workforce can meet existing
and new challenges.
EPA's FY 2001 Strategic Plan also broadly
recognized the importance of human capital as a key
priority for the Agency. In addition, GAO reported
that EPA needs to implement a workforce planning
strategy to determine the skills and competencies
needed to meet current and future needs. This need
will intensify as about half of EPA's scientific and
senior managers become eligible for retirement
within the next 5 years. In response, EPA has begun
implementing a Human Capital Strategic Plan. EPA's
workforce planning efforts call for identifying the
skills needed in every program unit based on an
assessment of future program needs, identifying skill
gaps, and tying skill needs to future budget requests.
EPA plans to award a contract in early calendar year
2002 to develop a model workforce planning process
and a system that will meet the Agency's
competency-based workforce planning needs.
EPA's Human Capital Strategy specifically addresses
the need for management and leadership competencies
by implementing a series of management development
programs. The Agency needs to further its commitment
to deploy the strategy by dedicating resources,
developing performance measures, implementing
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Management Accomplishments and Challenges 111-15
-------
necessary systems for recruiting and developing needed
competencies, and then holding managers accountable.
QUALITY OF LABORATORY DATA
The quality of laboratory data supplied to EPA for
regulatory compliance and remediation purposes
continues to be a pressing issue. Environmental data
of questionable authenticity can lead to concerns
about the soundness of EPA's decisions pertaining to
the protection of the environment and public health.
Furthermore, data integrity issues lead to additional
costs and unnecessary delays when the Agency has to
identify and assess the impact of the fraudulent data
and undertake additional sampling.
In a June 1999 memorandum to the Acting
Deputy Administrator, we suggested actions EPA
could take to better identify data of questionable
quality. However, ongoing lab fraud investigations
indicate that despite Agency efforts to ensure data
quality, manipulated data continue to be generated
and supplied to the Agency.
Our reviews and investigations have disclosed a
particularly disturbing trend in the number of
environmental laboratories that are providing
misleading and fraudulent data to the states for
monitoring the Nation's public water supplies.
Several current lab fraud investigations involve severe
manipulation of lab data used to evaluate the
compliance of public water supplies with federal
drinking water standards. Some of these
manipulations have masked potential violations of
the drinking water regulations. Many of the Agency's
other programs (e.g., Superfund, Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, National Pollutant
Discharge and Elimination System, air toxics;
underground storage tanks, and pesticides) have also
been affected by laboratory fraud.
The number of ongoing lab fraud investigations
has doubled over the past year. One of the
investigations resulted in the indictment of 13
persons, with 5 convictions. The laboratory made a
criminal plea of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and
received a $9 million fine. Environmental decisions
based on these manipulated data at numerous
military and civilian waste sites had to be reviewed
and, in many cases, verified through additional
testing. One EPA region estimated that the
consequential damages resulting from this activity were
approximately $1 million.
The Agency has conducted extensive technical
systems assessment audits at all EPA regional and
research laboratories. In addition, EPA has provided
fraud detection and awareness training and ethics
training, studied electronic methods for screening data,
and issued guidance discussing the level of quality
assurance in relation to the intended use of data.
These efforts should help to improve the quality
assurance systems and documentation throughout the
Agency's environmental laboratories. However, until
the impact of these and any other recommended
actions is realized, EPA must continue to assess and
improve its controls over laboratory data quality.
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. Therefore, it is
essential that the Agency prevent intrusion and abuse
of its information systems and protect the integrity
of its data.
We have issued a number of reports that cited
critical inadequacies in the Agency's information
security program and recommended specific
corrective actions. In addition, a July 2000 GAO
review of EPA's information security program found
serious and pervasive problems in the program that
"essentially rendered it ineffective." GAO's report
identified the existing practices as weak and largely a
paper exercise that had done little to mitigate risks to
the Agency's data and systems.
EPA has made substantial improvements to its
Information Security Program. The Agency has
improved its risk assessment and planning processes,
implemented major new technical and procedural
controls, begun the issuance of new policies, and,
finally, begun a regular process of testing and
evaluation. Under the leadership of the Office of
Environmental Information (OEI), EPA has been
working to achieve the Agency's goals of making
information on its computer systems available, while
protecting the confidentiality and integrity of its
information. Although no security program is
perfect, the Agency's Information Security Program
is substantially stronger than it was.
111-16 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
The dynamic nature of security, however, requires
continued emphasis and vigilance. More needs to be
done to protect the Agency's information and systems.
In our view, EPA needs to establish a strong centralized
security program with oversight processes that would
adequately address risks and ensure that valuable
information resources and environmental data are
secure. Given the Agency's decentralized organizational
structure, it is essential that OEI establish a strong
leadership and monitoring role to ensure the success of
its computer security program.
EPA'S USE OF ASSISTANCE AGREEMENTS
TO ACCOMPLISH ITS MISSION
Assistance agreements constitute approximately
one-half of EPA's budget and are the primary
vehicles through which the Agency delivers
environmental and human health protection.
Therefore, it is important that EPA and the public
receive what the Agency has paid for.
Over the past several years, our audit work has
repeatedly identified problems in the delivery of
environmental protection activities through
assistance agreements. For example, we reported in
September 2000 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 unallowable activities or had inadequate or
untimely work plans and progress reports.
Recent audits of EPA's assistance recipients
disclosed that some recipients did not have adequate
financial and internal controls to ensure that federal
funds were managed properly. As a result, EPA had
limited assurance that grant funds were used in
accordance with work plans 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. Also,
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 grant funds also resulted in
an agreement with the City of Cleveland to settle a
civil lawsuit charging that the city's Air Pollution Control
Program improperly spent a total of $429,158 in grant
funds awarded by EPA.
Further, in May 2001 the OIG reported that the
Agency did not have a policy for competitively
awarding discretionary assistance funds, totaling
$1.3 billion, and recommended such a policy be
developed. Without competition, EPA cannot ensure
that it is funding the best products based on merit
and cost-effectiveness, thereby achieving program
objectives and accomplishing its environmental
mission. The Agency agreed and is drafting a policy
that will address competition in the award of
discretionary assistance funds.
The Agency has completed a number of actions
to improve its oversight controls over assistance
agreements, including requiring additional training
for all project officers and issuing policy on project
officer and grant management oversight roles and
responsibilities. We are reviewing those actions and
will continue to work with the Agency to identify
solutions to assistance problems.
BACKLOG OF NATIONAL POLLUTANT
DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES)
PERMITS
The Clean Water Act specifies that NPDES
permits may not be issued for more than 5 years.
Permittees wishing to continue discharging beyond
that term must submit an application for permit
renewal at least 6 months prior to the expiration date
of their permit. If the permitting authority receives
that application but does not reissue the permit prior
to expiration, the permit may be "administratively
continued." These administratively continued permits
are considered "backlogged."
Backlogged permits are an important issue because
the conditions on which the existingpermit is based
might have changed since the original permit was
issued. These changed conditions might require that the
permittee discharge less toxic waste or less volume of
waste. The "backlogged" permit would not contain
these new terms and conditions, thereby delaying
potential environmental improvements to waters. EPA
is the permitting authority for 6 states and has delegated
permitting authority to the remaining 44 states. The
Agency recognizes that the backlog of NPDES
permits is a nationwide problem and has developed a
corrective action plan that includes a variety of
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Management Accomplishments and Challenges 111-17
-------
strategies to reduce the backlog. These strategies include
creating a streamlined process for developing permits
by taking advantage of new technology, providing
assistance to the states through both environmental
assessments and permit assistance, and communicating
the importance of this issue to the states and EPA
regional offices and receiving firm commitments to
reduce the backlog from them.
EPA's goal is to reduce the backlog of NPDES
permits for major facilities tolO percent by the end
of calendar year 2001 and tolO percent for major
and minor permits by the end of calendar year 2004.
As of August 2001, the percentage of backlogged
permits was 23.5 percent for majors and 27 percent
for minors. According to EPA officials, the 2001 goal
will not be met because of the dramatic increase in
the complexity of writing NPDES permits over the
past several years due to the number of parameters
included in permits.
EPA realizes that its current permitting system
needs to be reevaluated and that the Agency needs to
find new ways of implementing the NPDES
program or the problem will become worse.
According to EPA officials, the number of point
sources needing permits has increased five times in
the past 10 years. EPA is considering a number of
innovative methods to address the expanding scope
of the NPDES program. For example, the use of
general permits that are written for a class of similar
facilities and the use of information technology to
expedite the entire permit development process,
including electronic submission of permit
applications, electronic files to develop permits, and
electronic reports, are all viable options.
We will continue to monitor the progress EPA
makes in addressing this important issue. Eliminating
the backlog and making the permit issuance process
more efficient will free up resources for other
important activities.
EPA'S WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH THE
STATES
During the past 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 recognized that existing arrangements for
implementing environmental programs and addressing
environmental problems were not as efficient and
effective as they could be.
EPA depends heavily on states to fund and
implement national programs, as well as to provide
most of the environmental data. EPA and states have
not yet agreed on how states will have flexibility
while being accountable for environmental results.
Relations between EPA and states have been strained
because of disagreements over (1) respective roles
and the extent of federal oversight; (2) priorities and
budgets; and (3) results-oriented performance
measures, milestones, and data. EPA can improve its
working relationship with states by establishing a
structure to set direction, establish goals, provide
training, oversee accomplishments, and ensure
accountability of EPA program and regional offices
for encouraging and facilitating joint planning and
priority setting with the states.
In an audit of state enforcement of the Clean
Water Act, we reported that the state programs
could be much more effective in deterring
noncompliance with discharge permits and,
ultimately, improving the quality of the Nation's
water. EPA and the states have been successful in
reducing point source pollution. Despite
tremendous progress, however, nearly 40 percent of
the Nation's assessed waters are not meeting the
standards states have set for them. The state
strategies we evaluated needed to be modified to
better address environmental risks, including
contaminated runoff. Contaminated runoff,
including agricultural and urban runoff, was widely
accepted as causing the majority of the Nation's
remaining water quality problems. We
recommended that EPA work with the states to
develop risk-based enforcement priorities and
upgrade the Permit Compliance System to ensure
that the system meets federal and state needs.
The National Environmental Performance
Partnership System (NEPPS) established a new
frame-work to reinvent the EPA-state working
relationship to better focus on working as partners to
accomplish complex environmental issues with
scarce resources. As one of the primary tools for
implementing NEPPS, performance partnership
grants (PPGs) allow states and tribes to combine
multiple EPA grants into one. EPA began
implementing PPGs in 1996.
111-18 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
In a series of audits on regional and state NEPPS
program implementation (including PPGs), we found
that NEPPS principles were not well integrated into
EPA because of the lack of (1) leadership providing a
clear direction and 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.
Since we began issuing our reports in September
1999, EPA has taken several steps to ensure that
NEPPS fulfills its potential. To address the lack of
leadership and clear direction for NEPPS, the Agency
formally designated the Assistant Administrator for
the Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental
Relations as the National Program Manager for
NEPPS. The Agency also began drafting a handbook
to promote understanding of NEPPS and included
PPG project officer training as part of its national
grants conference.
The current Administration has also taken steps
to set Agency direction for NEPPS and to better
integrate NEPPS into EPA. The Administrator has
emphasized a personal interest in seeing NEPPS
succeed and expand. She described NEPPS as an
excellent model of how EPA should work with states
and asked Regional Administrators to provide her
with regular reports on how NEPPS is working. She
also asked the Assistant Administrators to work with
the EPA regions and states in identifying areas where
flexibility is available and to encourage the testing of
new measures of program performance.
Although EPA has taken some notable actions,
we believe much remains to be done to improve its
working relationship with states. For example, the
Agency and state managers continue to struggle with
how to provide states flexibility to address their
highest environmental priorities while continuing to
implement and report on core program
requirements. In addition, EPA has not defined its
performance measures and related milestones to
monitor EPA and state progress toward
accomplishing NEPPS and PPG goals. We will
continue to monitor the Agency's progress in
addressing this important issue.
PROTECTING INFRASTRUCTURE FROM
NONTRADITIONAL ATTACKS
Under Presidential Decision Directive (FDD) 63,
initiated in May 1998, federal agencies are required to
review by May 2003 their respective critical physical
and cyber-based infrastructures to ensure the
performance of their mission in the event of
nontraditional attacks within the United States. The
Directive also places additional responsibility with
federal agencies considered to have a major sector
vulnerable to infrastructure attacks. EPA has been
designated the Lead Agency and Sector Liaison for the
Nation's water systems. The Agency, in cooperation
with its private sector counterparts, is to address
potential areas of vulnerability and protection of the
Nation's critical water system infrastructure.
In June 2001 we reported that funding problems
had caused delays in attempts by EPA and the private
sector to develop a national framework for
protecting this critical infrastructure. Consequently,
some key PDD 63 requirements, such as conducting
vulnerability assessments and risk mitigation, as well
as implementing a Vulnerability Awareness and
Education Program for the water sector, had yet to
be achieved. As a result, the OIG could not state
whether EPA and its private sector counterparts
would be successful in their attempt to develop a
national framework for protecting the critical
infrastructure of the Nation's water supply.
In our report, we recommended that the Agency
complete PDD 63 activities in process, fill gaps in
critical infrastructure planning, and address resource
needs. In response, the Agency generally agreed with
our conclusions and recommendations. The Agency
cited various actions to address security issues,
including developing a vulnerability assessment
methodology for the industry, training utilities to
undertake vulnerability assessments, revising
emergency operations plans to incorporate specific
counterterrorism measures, supporting the
development of a secure Information System and
Analysis Center, and awarding grants to study the use
of advanced technology to produce devices for
detecting dangerous microorganisms in water supplies.
In light of the events of September 11,2001, the
OIG and the Senate Committee on Environment
and Public Works asked the Agency in October to
report its current and more immediate action plans
www. epa.gov/ocfo
Management Accomplishments and Challenges 111-19
-------
to protect the Nation's water systems from terrorist
attack. In a November 19, 2001, memo to the OIG,
the Agency reported that the Administrator has
established a Water Protection Task Force with a
staff working full-time on implementing FDD 63
and other related activities. (This move increased the
staff working on water security issues from 1 full-
time engineer to about 10 full-time staff and many
part-time EPA specialists.) Significant progress has
been made on many of the tasks outlined in a 1998
draft plan to develop the National Infrastructure
Assurance Plan: Water Supply Sector. Most of the
tasks have been examined closely, revised as
appropriate, and placed on an accelerated schedule so
that the majority of activities will be completed by
the end of 2002, with the remainder completed in
2003. In addition to accelerating the work, the
Agency has expanded the work to include support
for all water systems, both drinking water and
wastewater. (The original plan was to focus on the
largest drinking water systems serving more than
100,000 people.)
This is a major Agency initiative with national
impact that merits continued attention to ensure that
planned activities are implemented; milestones are
met; and issues are reported, addressed, and
corrected as soon as possible. We will monitor the
Agency's progress on this important water issue.
111-20 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Section IV
FY 2001 Annual
Financial
Statements
-------
CONTENTS
Chief Financial Officer's Analysis IV-3
Principal Financial Statements IV-5
OIG's Report on EPA's Financial Statements IV-61
www.epa.gov/ocfo FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-1
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
IV-2 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER'S ANALYSIS OF EPA'S
FISCAL YEAR 2001 AND 2000 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Summary of Auditor's Report and Opinions
The Agency prepared the following FY 2001 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. 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, 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 years ended September 30, 2001, and 2000, and budgetary resources as of and for the year ended
September 30, 2001, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles."
Report on Internal Controls
Although the OIG's Audit Report on EPAs Fiscal 2001 and 2000 Financial Statements cited three
reportable conditions, the Report did not identify any material weaknesses.1 These reportable conditions are
summarized below, along with a short statement of the Agency's position with respect to each of those items.
• EPA Did Not Implement Accounting for Internal Use Software Standard Timely - OIG noted that
the Agency did not issue formal policy and guidance until two days prior to the end of the fiscal year. This
delay meant that the standard was not being followed during the course of the fiscal year. Consequently, the
amount of capitalized software recognized on the financial statements was determined using estimates.
OIG felt that some of supporting documentation was insufficient and thus that the software balance of
$11 million might be understated. However, the OIG did not recommend any corrective actions since the
implementing policy was issued.
OCFO acknowledges that the Agency did not issue final internal policies and procedures implementing the
new software accounting standard until the end of the fiscal year. In order to ensure that the FY 2001
financial statements incorporated the new standard, OCFO drew on existing OMB information technology
reporting requirements as the basis for a comprehensive review of all major Agency systems. This review
determined whether each system included software subject to the new standard or was exempt based on
dollar thresholds or other standard-prescribed criteria. As a result, OCFO determined the correct amount to
be recognized.
• Additional Improvements Needed in EPA's Interagency Agreement Invoice Approval Process - The
Audit Report recognizes that the Agency has taken a number of corrective actions to strengthen the EPA
Interagency Agreement (TAG) invoice approval process since the OIG first made recommendations on this
topic in the fiscal 1994 Audit Report. The current Audit Report makes no new recommendations. The
Agency's only open corrective action is to implement an automated project officer notification system to
replace our current manual system and that action should be completed by April 30, 2002.
• Automated Application Processing Controls - In this Audit and in earlier Audit Reports the OIG stated
that they have not found the documentation supporting the Agency's Integrated Financial Management
System (IFMS) adequate to perform an assessment of IFMS's automated input, processing, and output
1 A material weakness is a reportable condition 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 misstatement of 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.
www.epa.gov/ocfo FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-3
-------
controls. Although the Agency has taken a number of actions to address the OIG's concerns, the Agency's
current focus is on the project to replace IFMS and in providing thorough documentation of the new
system. The Audit Report noted that the OIG believes EPA is moving in a credible fashion toward replacing
IFMS. The OIG made no new recommendations.
Compliance with Laws and Regulations
Substantial Noncompliance with the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act (FFMIA)
The OIG identified only one area where they believed the OCFO was in substantial noncompliance with
the FFMIA, and that concerned Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards No. 4, "Managerial Cost
Accounting Concepts and Standards for the Federal Government." The OIG included this finding in the prior two
Financial Statement Audit Reports. While OCFO agrees that improvements in cost accounting can be made,
and has continued to take initiative as a federal leader in this area, OCFO also believes that the Agency
substantially complies with this Standard. In accordance with the provisions of the FFMIA, the OIG has
elevated this issue to the EPA Administrator.
Other Noncompliance Issues with FFMIA
The OIG cited, as a nonsubstantial noncompliance, EPAs difficulties in reconciling its intragovernmental
assets and liabilities with its federal trading partners. The OIG states that without the proper confirmations
from each of its trading partners, EPA cannot fully assure that its intragovernmental balances are accurate.
However, the OIG recognized that this is a federal wide problem and that EPA has been proactive in addressing
the challenges of reconciliation. We appreciate the OIG's acknowledgment of our efforts.
Progress in Correcting Previously Identified Problems
OCFO management completed a major effort to improve the preparation process for our financial
statements this year, including automating the generation of the principal schedules. In order to meet the
challenges associated with accelerated submission dates in future years, OCFO will continue to identify areas
where this process can be further automated and streamlined for future financial statements.
We also have completed a number of major action items in our FY 1999 Remediation Plan and expect to
have all the actions completed by mid-summer of 2002. OCFO, the Facilities Management and Services
Division, and the Office of Acquisition Management have worked together and improved the accounting
process for capitalized property. Also we have completed our process improvements for reviewing unliquidated
obligations. As a result, there were no reportable conditions listed in this year's audit report regarding property
accounting or unliquidated obligations.
IV-4 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
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
Consolidating 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. Statement of Financing
Note 30. Costs Not Assigned to Goals
Note 31. Transfers-in and out, Statement of Changes in Net Position
Note 32. Imputed Financing
Note 33. Payroll and Benefits Payable
Note 34. Restatement of Imputed Costs and Financing for Prior Years
Note 35. Change in Accounting for Trust Funds in FY 2000
Note 36. Change in Accounting for Cashout Interest, Superfund in FY 2000
Note 37. Change in Accounting for Expenditure Transfers
www.epa.gov/ocfo FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-5
-------
Supplemental Information Requested by OMB
Required Supplemental Information
Deferred Maintenance (Unaudited)
Intragovernmental Assets (Unaudited)
Intragovernmental 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-6 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONSOLIDATING BALANCE SHEET
AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2001 AND 2000 (FY2000 Restated-See Note37*)
(Dollars in Thousands)
ASSETS
Intragovernmental:
Fund Balance with Treasury (Note 2)
Investments (Note 4)
Accounts Receivable, Net (Notes 5 and 37)
Other (Note 6)
Total Intragovernmental
Accounts Receivable, Net (Note 5)
Loans Receivables, Net - Non Federal (Note 7)
Cash (Note 3)
Inventory & Property Received in Settlement (Note 8)
Property, Plant and Equipment, Net (Note 9)
Other (Note 6)
Total Assets
LIABILITIES
Intragovernmental:
Accounts Payable (Note 37)
Accrued Liabilities
Custodial Liability (Note 11)
Debt (Note 10)
Other (Note 12)
Total Intragovernmental
Accounts Payable
Accrued Liabilities
Cashout Advances & Deferrals, Superfund (Note 15)
Payroll and Benefits Payable (Note 33)
Pensions and Other Actuarial Liabilities (Note 14)
Environmental Cleanup Costs (Note 20)
Commitments and Contingencies (Note 18)
Other (Note 12 and Note 13)
Total Liabilities
NET POSITION
Unexpended Appropriations (Note 16)
Cumulative Results of Operations (Note 37)
Total Net Position (Note 37)
Total Liabilities and Net Position
Superfund
Trust Fund
FY2001
$ 6,706
3,724,044
31,178
5,521
$ 3,767,449
466,038
0
0
0
16,515
8,878
$ 4,258,880
$ 65,809
57,728
0
0
21,308
144,845
39,878
97,857
394,699
35,111
7,731
0
3,778
27,659
751,558
0
3,507,322
3,507,322
$ 4,258,880
Superfund
Trust Fund
FY 2000*
$ 37,397 $
3,960,313
40,671
21,789
4,060,170
617,039
0
0
5,086
13,581
750
$ 4,696,626 $
$ 121,920 $
51,748
0
0
8,848
182,516
46,066
145,358
372,586
32,832
6,637
0
5,000
30,192
821,187
0
3,875,439
3,875,439
$ 4,696,626 $
All
Others
FY2001
11,272,374
1,778,818
69,977
4,386
13,125,555
75,027
75,552
0
253
526,893
875
13,804,155
1,118
40,541
77,778
31,124
27,507
178,068
91,083
564,191
0
163,730
31,902
14,528
6,020
60,536
1,110,058
10,358,961
2,335,136
12,694,097
13,804,155
All
Others
FY 2000*
$ 11,059,256
1,593,357
80,824
7,452
12,740,889
87,895
89,128
48
347
473,028
1,712
$ 13,393,047
$ 1,506
50,580
102,469
37,922
28,849
221,326
84,956
631,909
0
151,363
27,036
15,499
2,950
49,147
1,184,186
10,119,838
2,089,023
12,208,861
$ 13,393,047
Combined
Totals
FY2001
$ 11,279,080
5,502,862
101,155
9,907
16,893,004
541,065
75,552
0
253
543,408
9,753
$ 18,063,035
$ 66,927
98,269
77,778
31,124
48,815
322,913
130,961
662,048
394,699
198,841
39,633
14,528
9,798
88,195
1,861,616
10,358,961
5,842,458
16,201,419
$ 18,063,035
* Intragovernmental Accounts Receivable and Payable and Cumulative Results of Operations restated for FY 2000 - see Note 37.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements
IV-7
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONSOLIDATING BALANCE SHEET
AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2001 AND 2000 (FY2000 Restated-See Note37*)
(Dollars in Thousands)
Combined Intra-agency Intra-agency Consolidated Consolidated
Totals Elimination Elimination Totals Totals
FY2000* FY2001 FY2000* FY2001 FY2000
ASSETS
Intragovernmental:
Fund Balance with Treasury (Note 2)
Investments (Note 4)
Accounts Receivable, Net (Notes 5 and 37)
Other (Note 6)
Total Intragovernmental
Accounts Receivable, Net (Note 5)
Loans Receivables, Net - Non Federal (Note 7)
Cash (Note 3)
Inventory & Property Received in Settlement (Note 8)
GeneralProperty, Plant and Equipment, Net (Note 9)
Other (Note 6)
Total Assets
LIABILITIES
Intragovernmental:
Accounts Payable (Note 37)
Accrued Liabilities
Custodial Liability (Note 11)
Debt (Note 10)
Other (Note 12)
Total Intragovernmental
Accounts Payable
Accrued Liabilities
Cashout Advances & Deferrals, Superfund (Note 15)
Payroll and Benefits Payable (Note 33)
Pensions and Other Actuarial Liabilities (Note 14)
Environmental Cleanup Costs (Note 20)
Commitments and Contingencies (Note 18)
Other (Note 12 and Note 13)
Total Liabilities
NET POSITION
Unexpended Appropriations (Note 16)
Cumulative Results of Operations (Note 37)
Total Net Position (Note 37)
Total Liabilities and Net Position
$ 11,096,653 $
5,553,670
121,495
29,241
16,801,059
704,934
89,128
48
5,433
486,609
2,462
$ 18,089,673 $
$ 123,426 $
102,328
102,469
37,922
37,697
403,842
131,022
777,267
372,586
184,195
33,673
15,499
7,950
79,339
2,005,373
10,119,838
5,964,462
16,084,300
$ 18,089,673 $
0 $
0
(48,128)
(5,739)
(53,867)
0
0
0
0
0
0
(53,867) 0
(45,271) $
(3,241)
0
0
(5,355)
(53,867)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(53,867)
0
0
0
(53,867) $
0
0
(50,644)
(6,510)
(57,154)
0
0
0
0
0
0
(57,154)
(46,453)
(4,191)
0
0
(6,510)
(57,154)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(57,154)
0
0
0
(57,154)
$ 11,279,080
5,502,862
53,027
4,168
$ 16,839,137
541,065
75,552
0
253
543,408
9,753
$ 18,009,168
21,656
95,028
77,778
31,124
43,460
$ 269,046
130,961
662,048
394,699
198,841
39,633
14,528
9,798
88,195
1,807,749
10,358,961
5,842,458
16,201,419
$ 18,009,168
$ 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
98,137
102,469
37,922
31,187
346,688
131,022
777,267
372,586
184,195
33,673
15,499
7,950
79,339
1,948,219
10,119,838
5,964,462
16,084,300
$ 18,032,519
* Intragovernmental Accounts Receivable and Payable and Cumulative Results of Operations restated for FY 2000 - see Note 37.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF NET COST BY GOAL
FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001
(Dollars in Thousands)
Clean and Prevent Better Waste
Clean Air Safe Water Safe Food Pollution Management Global Risks
COSTS:
Federal
With the Public
Total Costs
Less:
Earned Revenues
Total Revenue
Management Cost
Allocation
NET COST OF OPERATIONS
$ 87,360 $ 156,900 $ 30,210 $ 41,065
458,256 3,482,906 77,687 236,933
545,616 3,639,806 107,897 277,998
702 4,966 17,051 1,545
702 4,966 17,051 1,545
65,958 77,128 33,657 42,067
$ 610,872 $ 3,711,968 $ 124,503 $ 318,520
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
$ 465,452
1,442,650
1,908,102
510,905
510,905
103,802
$ 1,500,999
$ 39,816
186,919
226,735
7,286
7,286
23,282
$ 242,731
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF NET COST BY GOAL
FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 - Restated (See Note 34)
COSTS:
Federal (Note 34)
With the Public
Total Costs
Less:
Earned Revenues
Total Revenue
Management Cost
Allocation (Note 34)
NET COST OF OPERATIONS
(Note 34)
(Dollars in Thousands)
Clean and Prevent
Clean Air Safe Water Safe Food Pollution
$ 62,400 $ 134,808 $ 18,372 $ 29,823
462,922 3,209,971 80,003 231,151
525,322 3,344,779 98,375 260,974
219 5,794 21,247 4,180
219 5,794 21,247 4,180
53,522 73,540 21,779 34,754
$ 578,625 $ 3,412,525 $ 98,907 $ 291,548
Better Waste
Management
$ 387,651
1,478,910
1,866,561
336,253
336,253
135,265
$ 1,665,573
Global Risks
$ 30,549
179,880
210,429
6,939
6,939
15,755
$ 219,245
Detailed descriptions of the above Goals are provided in EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report, Section II - Performance Results.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-9
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF NET COST BY GOAL
FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001
(Dollars in Thousands)
COSTS:
Federal
With the Public
Total Costs
Less:
Earned Revenues
Total Revenue
Management Cost
Allocation
NET COST OF OPERATIONS
Right Sound Credible Effective
to Know Science Deterrent Management
$ 41,540 $ 58,804 $ 100,116 $ 66,461
126,154 290,056 299,021 424,036
167,694 348,860 399,137 490,497
324 706 786 4,330
324 706 786 4,330
30,017 47,331 62,925 (486,167)
$ 197,387 $ 395,485 $ 461,276 $ 0
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Not Assigned
to Goals*
$ 29,438
(60,997)
(31,539)
(1,898)
(1,898)
0
$ (29,641)
Consolidated
Totals
$ 1,117,162
6,963,641
8,080,803
546,703
546,703
0
$ 7,534,100
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF NET COST BY GOAL
FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 - Restated (See Note 34)
COSTS:
Federal (Note 34)
With the Public
Total Costs
Less:
Earned Revenues
Total Revenue
Management Cost
Allocation (Note 34)
NET COST OF OPERATIONS
(Note 34)
(Dollars in Thousands)
Right Sound Credible Effective
to Know Science Deterrent Management
$ 22,120 $ 42,324 $ 52,421 $ 125,211
114,439 286,882 317,423 339,874
136,559 329,206 369,844 465,085
338 1,490 495 1,694
338 1,490 495 1,694
22,752 30,676 75,348 (463,391)
$ 158,973 $ 358,392 $ 444,697 $ 0
Not Assigned
to Goals*
$ 120,149
25,346
145,495
3,335
3,335
0
$ 142,160
Consolidated
Totals
$ 1,025,828
6,726,801
7,752,629
381,984
381,984
0
$ 7,370,645
* See Note 30.
Detailed descriptions of the above Goals are provided in EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report, Section II - Performance Results.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
IV-10 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF NET COST
FOR THE YEARS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001 AND 2000 - FY2000 Restated (See Note34)
(Dollars in Thousands)
COSTS:
Intragovernmental (Note 34)
With the Public
Expenses from Other Appropriations (Note 23)
Total Costs
Less:
Earned Revenues
Total Revenue
NET COST OF OPERATIONS (Note 34)
Superfund
Trust Fund
FY2001
$ 426,499 $
1,179,013
$ 103,654
$ 1,709,166
$ 488,397
$ 488,397
$ 1,220,769 :
Superfund
Trust Fund
FY 2000*
353,782 $
1,259,464
31,270
1,644,516
307,200
307,200
I 1,337,316 :
All
Others
FY2001
710,290 $
5,784,628
(103,654)
6,391,264
77,933
77,933
I 6,313,331 :
All
Others
FY 2000*
689,140 $
5,467,337
(31,270)
6,125,207
91,878
91,878
I 6,033,329
Combined
Totals
FY2001
1,136,789
6,963,641
0
8,100,430
566,330
566,330
$ 7,534,100
*Restated amounts - See Note 34.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF NET COST
FOR THE YEARS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001 AND 2000 - FY2000 Restated (See Note34)
(Dollars in Thousands)
Combined Intra-agency Intra-agency Consolidated Consolidated
Totals Eliminations Eliminations Totals Totals
FY2000* FY2001 FY2000* FY2001 FY2000*
COSTS:
Intragovernmental (Note 34)
With the Public
Expenses from Other Appropriations (Note 23)
Total Costs
Less:
Earned Revenues
Total Revenue
NET COST OF OPERATIONS (Note 34)
$ 1,042,922 $
6,726,801
$ 0
$ 7,769,723 $
$ 399,078
$ 399,078
$ 7,370,645 $
(19,627) $
0
0
(19,627) |
(19,627)
(19,627)
0 J
(17,094) $
0
0
; (17,094) :
(17,094)
(17,094)
; o :
1,117,162 $
6,963,641
0
I 8,080,803
546,703
546,703
I 7,534,100
1,025,828
6,726,801
0
$ 7,752,629
381,984
381,984
$ 7,370,645
^Restated amounts - See Note 34.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-11
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET POSITION
FOR THE YEARS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001 AND 2000 (FY2000Restated*-SeeNotes34 &37)
(Dollars in Thousands)
Superfund
Trust Fund
FY2001
Net Cost of Operations (Note 34) $
Financing Sources
(Other Than Exchange Revenues) :
Appropriations Used
Taxes & Non-Exchange Interest (Note 17)
Other Non-Exchange Revenue
Imputed Financing (Notes 32 and 34)
Trust Fund Appropriations (Note 17)
Transfers-In (Notes 31 and 37)
Transfers-Out (Notes 31 and 37)
Income from Other Appropriations (Note 23)
Net Results of Operations before Accounting Changes
for Trust Funds, Cashout Interest, & Transfers
Cumulative Effect of Trust Fund Accounting Changes
on Net Results of Operations (Note 35)
Cumulative Effect of Cashout Interest Accounting
Changes on Net Results of Operations (Note 36)
Cumulative Effect of Expenditure Transfer Accounting
Changes on Net Results of Operations (Note 37)
Net Change in Cumulative Results of Operations
Increases/ (Decreases) in Unexpended Appropriations
Change in Net Position
Net Position - Beginning of Period (Note 37)
Net Position - End of Period (Note 37) $
1,220,769
0
226,861
2,775
13,686
633,603
0
(127,927)
103,654
(368,117)
0
0
0
(368,117)
0
(368,117)
3,875,439
3,507,322
Superfund
Trust Fund
FY 2000*
$ 1,337,316 i
0
240,808
1,192
12,534
700,000
9,707
(124,200)
31,270
(466,005)
2,656,831
85,382
(45,188)
2,231,020
(2,656,831)
(425,811)
4,301,250
$ 3,875,439 !
All
Others
FY2001
£ 6,313,331 I
6,867,762
276,346
11,878
77,855
(633,603)
62,861
0
(103,654)
246,114
0
0
0
246,114
239,122
485,236
12,208,861
£ 12,694,097 I
All
Others
FY 2000*
I 6,033,329 I
6,632,631
260,272
12,958
70,384
(700,000)
64,995
(990)
(31,270)
275,651
91,596
0
45,188
412,435
42,874
455,309
11,753,552
I 12,208,861 :
Combined
Totals
FY2001
I 7,534,100
6,867,762
503,207
14,653
91,541
0
62,861
(127,927)
0
(122,003)
0
0
0
(122,003)
239,122
117,119
16,084,300
f 16,201,419
* FY 2000 Net Cost of Operations and Imputed Financing are restated - See Note 34.
Also FY 2000 Transfers-m, Transfers-out, and Ending Net Position are restated; with an addtional Accounting Change for Expenditure Transfers. - See Note 37
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
IV-12 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET POSITION
FOR THE YEARS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001 AND 2000 (FY2000Restated*-SeeNotes34 &37)
(Dollars in Thousands)
Combined Intra-agency Intra-agency Consolidated Consolidated
Totals Eliminations Eliminations Totals Totals
FY2000* FY2001 FY2000* FY2001 FY2000*
Net Cost of Operations (Note 34) J
Financing Sources
(Other Than Exchange Revenues) :
Appropriations Used
Taxes & Non-Exchange Interest (Note 17)
Other Non-Exchange Revenue
Imputed Financing (Notes 32 and 34)
Trust Fund Appropriations (Note 17)
Transfers-In (Notes 31 and 37)
Transfers-Out (Notes 31 and 37)
Income from Other Appropriations (Note 23)
Net Results of Operations before Accounting Changes
for Trust Funds, Cashout Interest, & Transfers
Cumulative Effect of Trust Fund Accounting Changes
on Net Results of Operations (Note 35)
Cumulative Effect of Cashout Interest Accounting
Changes on Net Results of Operations (Note 36)
Cumulative Effect of Expenditure Transfer Accounting
Changes on Net Results of Operations (Note 37)
Net Change in Cumulative Results of Operations
Increases/ (Decreases) in Unexpended Appropriations
Change in Net Position
Net Position - Beginning of Period (Note 37)
Net Position - End of Period (Note 37) J
: 7,370,645 $
6,632,631
501,080
14,150
82,918
0
74,702
(125,190)
0
(190,354)
2,748,427
85,382
0
2,643,455
(2,613,957)
29,498
16,054,802
; 16,084,300 $
0 $
0
0
0
0
0
(47,894)
47,894
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 $
o :
0
0
0
0
0
(49,990)
49,990
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o :
I 7,534,100 :
6,867,762
503,207
14,653
91,541
0
14,967
(80,033)
0
(122,003)
0
0
0
(122,003)
239,122
117,119
16,084,300
I 16,201,419 :
I 7,370,645
6,632,631
501,080
14,150
82,918
0
24,712
(75,200)
0
(190,354)
2,748,427
85,382
0
2,643,455
(2,613,957)
29,498
16,054,802
I 16,084,300
* FY 2000 Net Cost of Operations and Imputed Financing are restated - See Note 34.
Also FY 2000 Transfers-m, Transfers-out, and Ending Net Position are restated; with an addtional Accounting Change for Expenditure Transfers. - See Note 37
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements
IV-13
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
COMBINED STATEMENT OF BUDGETARY RESOURCES
FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001
(Dollars in Thousands)
Budgetary Resources
Budget Authority
Unobligated Balances, Beginning of Period
Net Transfers, Prior Period Balances
Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections
Adjustments (Note 26)
Total Budgetary Resources (Note 25)
Status of Budgetary Resources
Obligations Incurred (Note 25)
Unobligated Balances Available - Apportioned (Note 27)
Unobligated Balances Not Available (Note 27)
Total, Status of Budgetary Resources (Note 25)
Outlays (Note 25)
Obligations Incurred (Note 25)
Less: Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections and Adjustments
Subtotal
Obligated Balance, Net - Beginning of Period
Obligated Balance Transferred, Net
Less: Obligated Balance, Net - End of Period (Note 28)
Total Outlays (Note 2 5)
Superfund
Trust Fund
$ 1,288,437 $
450,538
0
348,758
196,644
$ 2,284,377 $
$ 1,570,056 $
714,321
0
$ 2,284,377 $
$ 1,570,056 $
(545,402)
$ 1,024,654 $
2,283,790
0
(2,108,696)
$ 1,199,748 $
All
Others
7,245,878 $
1,774,158
1,003
303,972
18,095
9,343,106 |
7,431,802 |
1,791,475
119,829
9,343,106 |
7,431,802 |
(380,786)
7,051,016 |
9,289,444
0
(9,324,855)
7,015,605 |
Combined
Totals
i 8,534,31
2,224,696
1,003
652,730
214,739
! 11,627,483
! 9,001,858
2,505,796
119,829
i 11,627,483
! 9,001,858
(926,188)
! 8,075,670
11,573,234
(11,433,551)
! 8,215,353
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
IV-14 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF FINANCING
FOR THE YEARS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001 AND 2000 (FY2000 Restated*-See Note 34)
(Dollars in Thousands)
Superfund Superfund
Trust Fund Trust Fund
FY 2001 FY 2000*
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
Imputed Financing for Cost Subsidies (Notes 32 and 34)
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
Not Yet Provided - (Increases)TDecreases
Change in Unfilled Customer Orders, etc.
Costs Capitalized on the Balance Sheet - (Increases)TDecreases
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 (Gain) on Disposition of Assets
Other Expenses not Requiring Budgetary Resources
Total Costs That Do Not Require Resources
Financing Sources Yet to be Provided (Note 29)
Net Costs of Operations (Note 34) $
1,570,056 $
(311,271)
3,716
(41,203)
0
(196,644)
13,686
103,654
0
(182,013)
959,981
192,384
41,203
(8,306)
0
(40)
0
(94,347)
130,894
4,031
133,761
0
(9,426)
699
129,065
829
1,220,769 $
1,701,337 $
(108,997)
13,324
(17,846)
(9,642)
(201,660)
12,534
31,270
39
(215,449)
1,204,910
143,536
17,846
(3,827)
0
0
0
(38,090)
119,465
3,654
3,075
0
(813)
45
5,961
6,980
1,337,316 I
All
Others
FY 2001
7,431,802 $
(227,827)
6,306
(36,273)
(46,178)
(76,814)
77,855
(103,654)
0
(2,072)
7,023,145
(117,998)
36,273
(74,092)
52
(4)
7,722
(587,424)
(735,471)
19,333
2,881
0
895
(5,686)
17,423
8,234
I 6,313,331 :
All
Others
FY 2000*
7,158,665
(230,981)
20,720
(54,653)
(46,358)
(111,767)
70,384
(31,270)
0
(3,088)
6,771,652
(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
f 6,033,329
* Imputed Financing and Net Cost of Operations restated for FY 2000 - See Note 34.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements
IV-15
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF FINANCING
FOR THE YEARS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001 AND 2000 (FY2000 Restated*-See Note 34)
(Dollars in Thousands)
Consolidated Consolidated
Totals Totals
FY 2001** FY 2000* **
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
Imputed Financing for Cost Subsidies (Notes 32 and 34)
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
Not Yet Provided - (Increases)TDecreases
Change in Unfilled Customer Orders, etc.
Costs Capitalized on the Balance Sheet - (Increases)TDecreases
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 (Gain) on Disposition of Assets
Other Expenses not Requiring Budgetary Resources
Total Costs That Do Not Require Resources
Financing Sources Yet to be Provided (Note 29)
Net Costs of Operations (Note 34)
$ 9,001,585 $ 8,860,002
(539,098)
10,022
(77,476)
(46,178)
(273,458)
91,541
0
0
(184,085)
7,983,126
74,386
77,476
(604,577)
146,488
9,063
7,534,100
(339,978)
34,044
(72,499)
(56,000)
(313,427)
82,918
0
39
(218,537)
7,976,562
69,191
71,073
(82,398)
52
(44)
7,722
(681,771)
(111,538)
(68)
153
5,014
(690,358)
(656,533)
23,364
136,642
0
(8,531)
(4,987)
24,305
4,593
(165)
(813)
3,454
31,374
19,242
7,370,645
* Imputed Financing and Net Cost of Operations restated for FY 2000 - See Note 34.
** This statement did not have any intraagency eliminations for FY 2001 or FY 2000.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
IV-16 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CUSTODIAL ACTIVITY
FOR THE YEARS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001 AND 2000
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY2001
FY2000
Revenue Activity:
Sources of Collections:
Fines and Penalties
Other
Total Cash Collections
Accrual Adjustment
Total Custodial Revenue (Note 24)
Disposition of Collections:
Transferred to Others (General Fund)
Increases/ (Decreases) in Amounts To Be Transferred
Total Disposition of Collections
Net Custodial Revenue Activity (Note 24)
114,830
$ 31,754 }
146,584
(24,692)
121,892
147,045
(25,153)
121,892
$ 0 }
76,850
f 18,418
95,268
(8,678)
86,590
97,730
(11,140)
86,590
f 0
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-17
-------
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 01-09, and the Agency's accounting policies which are
summarized in this note. In addition, to the guidance in Bulletin 01-09, 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 2001, 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. The Superfund Trust Fund 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 other Trust Fund appropriations, General Fund appropriations, Revolving Funds,
Special Funds, the Agency Budgetary Clearing accounts, Deposit Funds, General Fund Receipt accounts, the
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 the Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Trust Fund and the Oil
Spill Response Trust Fund. General Fund appropriations are the State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG),
Science and Technology (S&T), Environmental Programs and Management (EPM), Office of Inspector
IV-18 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
General (IG), Buildings and Facilities (B&F), and Payment to the Hazardous Substance Superfund. General
Fund appropriation activities that no longer receive current definite appropriations but have unexpended
authority are the Asbestos Loan Program 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 Valde^ oil spill. All Other Funds are as follows:
The LUST Trust Fund was authorized by the Superfund Amendments and Re authorization 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. Monies were
appropriated to the Oil Spill Response Trust Fund in 1993. 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 2001, Superfund research costs were appropriated in Superfund and transferred
to S&T to allow for proper accounting of the costs. Scientific 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) appropriation 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
www.epa.gov/ocfo FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-19
-------
Address Environmental Problems; 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 Funds are appropriated under those Trust Fund accounts and are transferred to the Office of
Inspector General account. The audit function provides contract, internal and performance, and financial and
grant audit services. The Office of Inspector General appro-priation 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 disburses the subsidy to the Financing Fund for increases in subsidy. The
Financing Fund receives the subsidy payment, borrows from Treasury and collects the asbestos loans. The
Asbestos Loan Program is accounted for under Treasury symbol 0118 for the subsidy and administrative
support, under Treasury symbol 4322 for loan disbursements, 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 FIFRA Revolving Fund was authorized by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act of 1972 as
amended and 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 Federal services of pesticide chemicals in or on food and animal feed. Effective January 2, 1997,
fees collected are now being collected and 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 a fee for services. WCF's customers currently consist solely of
Agency program offices. Accordingly, revenues 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.
Allocations and 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
IV-20 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
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 transfer allocations are accounted
for under Treasury symbols 0200,1010, and 4542; and the appropriation transfers are accounted for under 0108.
Clearing Accounts include the Budgetary suspense account, Unavailable Check Cancellations and Overpayments,
and Undistributed OPAC Payments and Collections. Clearing accounts are accounted for under Treasury
symbols 3875, 3880, and 3885.
Deposit funds include Fees for Ocean Dumping; Nonconformance Penalties; Clean Air Allowance Auction and
Sale; Advances without Orders; and 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, and 6500.
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, 3200, and 3220.
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 EPAs 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 to 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 were $56.3 million for FY 2000 and $53.5 million for FY 2001.
C. Budgets and Budgetary Accounting
Superfund
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
www.epa.gov/ocfo FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-21
-------
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 appropriations for S&T, EPM
and for the Office of the 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.
The Asbestos Loan Program is a commercial activity financed by a combination from two sources: one for
the long term costs of the loans and another for the remaining non-subsidized portion of the loans. Congress
adapted a one year appropriation, available for obligation in the fiscal year for which it was appropriated, to
cover the estimated long term cost of the Asbestos loans. 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 did not
represent long term cost was financed under a permanent indefinite borrowing authority established with the
Treasury. A permanent indefinite appropriation is available to finance the costs of subsidy re-estimates that
occur after the year in which the loan was disbursed. In FY 2000, subsidy increases totaled $3,580 thousand
which became an indefinite appropriation in FY 2001. In FY 2001, subsidy increases equaled $272 thousand for
loans disbursed from FY 1992 authority. The increases in subsidy will be appropriated in FY 2002. Also in
FY 2001, subsidy decreases totaled $1,313 thousand for loans disbursed from FY 1993 authority; the decreases
in subsidy will be deposited with Treasury in FY 2002.
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 and postage.
Funds transferred from other Federal agencies are funded by a non expenditure transfer of funds from the
other Federal agencies. As the Agency dis-burses the obligated amounts, the balance of funding available to the
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
Superfund 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 program receives most of its funding through appropriations that may be used, within
specific statutory limits, for operating and capital expenditures (primarily equipment). Additional financing for
the Superfund program is obtained through: reimbursements from other Federal agencies under Inter-Agency
Agreements (TAGs), state cost share payments under Superfund State Contracts (SSCs), and settlement proceeds
IV-22 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
from Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs), under CERCLA Section 122(b)(3), placed in special accounts.
Special accounts were previously limited to settlement amounts for future costs; however, beginning in FY 2000,
cost recovery amounts received under CERCLA Section 122(b)(3) settlements could be placed in special
accounts. Cost recovery settlements that are not placed in special accounts, continue to be deposited in the
Superfund Trust Fund.
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 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 outstanding loans through collections from the Program
fund for the subsidized portion of the loan. The last year Congress provided appropriations to make new loans
was 1993. 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
Superfund 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
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. No provision is made for unrealized gains or losses on these securities because, in the majority
of cases, they are held to maturity.
H. Marketable Equity Securities
Superfund
During FY 1993 and FY 1996, the Agency received marketable equity securities, valued at a total of
$5.1 million from a company in settlement of Superfund cost recovery actions, which were sold during
FY 2001. 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.
www.epa.gov/ocfo FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-23
-------
I. Notes Receivable
Superfund
In FY 2001, the Agency received a note receivable valued at $8.1 million, from a company in settlement of
Superfund cost recovery actions. The Agency records notes receivable at their face value and any accrued
interest as of the date of receipt.
J. 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.
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.
K. Loans Receivable
All Other Funds
Loans are accounted for as receivables after funds have been disbursed. The amount of Asbestos Loan
Program loans obligated but not disbursed is disclosed in Note 6. 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.
L. 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 2001, approximately $2.8 billion remained in the Treasury managed Superfund Trust Fund and
IV-24 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
approximately $83.5 million remained in the LUST Trust Fund to meet the Agency's disburse-ment needs.
During FY 2000, the funds' balances were $2.7 billion and $86.2 million, respectively.
M. 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.
N. Property, Plant, and Equipment
Superfund and All Other Funds
The Fixed Assets Subsystem (FAS), implemented in FY 1997, maintains EPA-held personal, real property,
and capital software records in accordance with Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards Number
Six, "Accounting for Property, Plant and Equipment,"(SFFAS No. 6). The FAS automatically generates
depreciation entries monthly based on acquisition dates. Purchases of EPA-held and contractor-held personal
property are capitalized if it 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. This modified straight-line
method is still used for contractor-held property. All EPA-held personal property purchased before the
implementation of FAS was assumed to have an estimated useful life of five years. New acquisitions of EPA-held
personal property are depreciated using the straight-line method over the specific assets with useful lives,
ranging from two to 15 years.
In FY 1997, EPA implemented requirements to capitalize software if the purchase price was $100,000 or
more with an estimated useful life of two years or more for the Working Capital Fund, which is a revenue
generating activity. In FY 2001, the Agency began capitalizing software for All Other Funds whose acquisition
value is $500,000 or more in accordance with the provisions of SFFAS No. 10, "Accounting for Internal Use
Software." Software is depreciated using the straight-line method over the specific assets' useful lives ranging
from two to 10 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
were valued at an estimated original cost basis, and land was valued at fair market value if purchased prior to
FY 1997. Real property purchased during and after FY 1997 are valued at actual costs. 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. Additions to property and improvements not meeting the capitalization criteria, expenditures for minor
alterations, and repairs and maintenance are expensed as incurred.
0. 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.
www.epa.gov/ocfo FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-25
-------
P. 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.
Q. 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 2001 and FY 2000, there was no outstanding interest payable to Treasury since payment was
made through September 30.
R. Accrued Unfunded Annual Leave
Superfund and All Other Funds
Annual, sick and other leave is expensed as taken during the fiscal year. Sick leave earned but not taken is
not accrued as a liability. Annual leave earned but not taken as of the end of the fiscal year is accrued as an
unfunded liability. Accrued unfunded annual leave is included in the Statement of Financial Position as a
component of "Other Liabilities-Governmental." As of September 30, 2001, the unfunded leave liability for
the Superfund Trust Fund was $20.4 million, and for All Other Funds, it was $98.2 million. During FY 2000,
these liabilities were $19.6 million for the Superfund Trust Fund and $93.2 million for All Other Funds.
S. Retirement Plan
Superfund and All Other Funds
Agency employees participate in either the Civil Service Retirement System (GSRS) or the Federal
Employees Retirement System (FERS). From October 1, 2000 to the pay period beginning prior to January 1,
2001, employees contributed 7.4% and 1.2% to GSRS and FERS, respectively. The employee contribution rates
were rolled back as of January 1, 2001 to 7% and 0.8%, respectively. The Agency contributed 8.51% to GSRS
employees' and 10.7% for FERS employees' retirement plans.
On January 1, 1987, the 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 GSRS. 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, provide EPA with the 'Cost
Factors' to compute EPA's liability for each program.
IV-26 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Note 2. Fund Balances with Treasury
Fund Balances with Treasury as of September 30, 2001 and 2000, consist of the following (in thousands):
FY 2001
FY 2000
Entity Non-Entity
Assets Assets
Trust Funds:
Superfund
LUST
Oil Spill
Revolving Funds:
FIFRA
Tolerance
Working Capital Fund
Appropriated
Other Fund Types
Total
$ 6,706 $
18,158
3,165
3,465
31
51,267
11,088,824
88,218
$ 11,259,834 $
o :
0
0
0
0
0
0
19,246
19,246 I
Total
I 6,706 I
18,158
3,165
3,465
31
51,267
11,088,824
107,464
I 11,279,080
Entity Non-Entity
Assets Assets
I 37,397 $
1,300
3,106
5,442
22
52,509
10,913,471
76,338
11,089,585 $
0 $
0
0
0
0
0
0
7,068
7,068 $
Total
37,397
1,300
3,106
5,442
22
52,509
10,913,471
83,406
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 clearing accounts and deposit funds. These funds are awaiting
documentation for the determination of proper accounting disposition.
Note 3. Cash
In All Others, as of September 30, 2000, Cash consisted of imprest funds totaling $48 thousand. All imprest
funds were closed out in fiscal year 2001.
Note 4. Investments
As of September 30, 2001 and 2000, investments consisted of the following:
Unamortized
(Premium)
Cost Discount
Interest Investments, Market
Receivable Net Value
SUPERFUND
Intragovernmental Securities
Non-Marketable
ALL OTHERS
Intragovernmental Securities
Non-marketable
FY2001
FY2000
FY2001
FY2000
$ 3,630,186 $ (33,967)
4,126,450 $ 166,180 $
1,703,909 $ (52,551)
$ 1,669,665 $
76,334
59,891 $ 3,724,044
3,724,044
43 $ 3,960,313 $ 3,960,313
22,358
26
1,778,818
1,593,357
1,778,818
1,593,357
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements
IV-27
-------
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 securities of 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. Accounts Receivable
The Accounts Receivable for September 30, 2001 and 2000, consist of the following:
Superfund Superfund All Other All Others
Intragovernmental Assests:
Accounts & Interest Receivable
Total
$ 31,178 $
$ 31,178 $
69,977 $
69,977 $
40,671 $
40,671 $
80,824
80,824
Non-Federal Assets:
Unbilled Accounts Receivable $ 86,470 $ 1,668 $ 88,209 $ 0
Accounts & Interest Receivable 949,566 133,787 883,938 155,581
Less: Allowance for Uncollectibles (569,998) (60,428) (355,108) (67,686)
Total $ 466,038 $ 75,027 $ 617,039 $ 87,895
The Allowance for Doubtful Accounts is determined on a specific identification basis as a result of a case-
by-case review of receivables, and a reserve on a percentage basis for those not specifically identified.
During FY 2001, an analysis of unbilled Federal accounts receivable revealed that approximately $10 million
of receivables could not be substantiated as valid reimbursements receivable from specific Federal agencies. The
net receivables were reduced by that amount. Of the total reductions, $2.8 million affected Superfund
receivables, $3.6 million affected expired All Other Funds, and $3.6 million were charged against All Other
Funds canceled as of September 30, 2001.
In addition, a non-Federal debtor owing $239 million in Superfund receivables declared bankruptcy. That
amount was therefore added to the allowance for uncollectibles for non-Federal receivables in FY 2001.
IV-28 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Note 6. Other Assets
Other Assets for September 30, 2001, consist of the following:
Intragovernmental Assets:
Advances to Federal Agencies $
Advances to Working Capital Fund
Advances for Postage
Total Intragovernmental Assets $
Non-Federal Assets:
Travel Advances $
Letter of Credit Advances
Grant Advances
Other Advances
Bank Card Payments
Deposit on Returnable Containers
Prepaid Rent
Bankruptcy Settlement*
Total Non-Federal Assets $
Superfund
Trust Fund
166 $
5,355
0
5,521 $
~7 ®
1 I
0
0
769
1
0
0
8,101
8,878 $
* Bankruptcy Settlement: A promissory note in the amount of $8.1
Global, Inc. Interest rate is 10.75 per annum with future payment
Other Assets for September 30,
Intragovernmental Assets:
Advances to Federal Agencies $
Advances to Working Capital Fund
Advances for Postage
Total Intragovernmental Assets $
Non-Federal Assets:
Travel Advances $
Letter of Credit Advances
Grant Advances
Other Advances
Bank Card Payments
Deposit on Returnable Containers
Prepaid Rent
Total Non-Federal Assets $
All
Others
4,265 $
0
121
4,386 $
(854) $
315
1,322
92
0
0
0
0
875 $
Combined Intra-agency
Totals Eliminations
4,431 :
5,355
121
9,907 :
(847) I
315
1,322
861
1
0
0
8,101
9,753 :
million was issued to the Superfund in
date of April 30, 2006.
$ (384)
(5,355)
0
$ (5,739)
if 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$ 0
Consolidated
Totals
$ 4,047
0
121
$ 4,168
$ (847)
315
1,322
861
1
0
0
8,101
$ 9,753
a bankruptcy settlement by Joy
2000, consist of the following:
Superfund
Trust Fund
15,279 $
6,510
0
21,789 $
(18) $
0
0
767
1
0
0
750 $
All
Others
7,409 $
0
43
7,452 $
(916) $
599
1,945
75
0
(2)
11
1,712 $
Combined Intra-agency
Totals Eliminations
22,688 :
6,510
43
29,241 :
(934) I
599
1,945
842
1
(2)
11
2,462 :
$ 0
(6,510)
0
$ (6,510)
if 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$ 0
Consolidated
Totals
$ 22,688
0
43
$ 22,731
$ (934)
599
1,945
842
1
(2)
11
$ 2,462
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.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements
IV-29
-------
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, 2001 and 2000, is provided in the
following sections.
FY 2001 FY 2000
Value of Value of
Loans Assests Related Loans Assests Related
Receivable, to Direct Receivable, to Direct
Gross Allowance* Loans Gross Allowance* Loans
Direct Loans Obligated
Prior to FY 1992 !
Direct Loans Obligated
After FY 1991
Total i
£ 49,683
42,779
S 92,462
$ 0 $
(16,910)
$ (16,910) $
49,683 $
25,869
75,552 $
58,114 ?
46,909
105,023 $
f 0 $
(15,895)
5 (15,895) $
58,114
31,014
89,128
k 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).
Subsidy Expenses for Post Credit Reform Loans:
Direct Loan Subsidy Expense - FY 2001
Direct Loan Subsidy Expense - FY 2000
Interest
Differential
$ 1,227
$ 2,640
Expected
Defaults
$ 2,353 1
$ 0 1
Fee
Offsets
f 0 $
f 0 $
Total
3,580
2,640
Note 8. Inventory and Property Received in Settlement, Net
The Inventory and Related Property at September 30, 2001 and 2000, consisted of the following:
FY 2001 FY 2000
Superfund All Others Superfund All Others
Operating Materials and Supplies Held for Use in $
Normal Operations
Securities Received in Settlement
Total $
0 $
0
0 $
253 $
0
253 $
0 $
5,086 $
5,086 $
306
41
347
The securities represented assets received during a bankruptcy proceeding, and were all sold in FY 2001.
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 software; real, EPA-Held and
Contractor-Held personal, and capitalized-leased property.
IV-30 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
As of September 30, 2001, Plant, Property and Equipment consisted of the following:
Superfund
All Others
Acquisition Accumulated
Value Depreciation
EPA-Held Equipment $
Software
Contractor-Held Equipment
Land and Buildings
Capital Leases
Total $
23,832 $
559
9,422
0
0
33,813 $
(15,031) $
(5)
(2,262)
0
0
(17,298) $
Net Book Acquisition Accumulated
Value Value Depreciation
8,801 $
554
7,160
0
0
16,515 $
161,253 }
10,398
16,752
500,854
40,992
730,249 ?
f (105,484) $
(148)
(7,647)
(76,951)
(13,126)
f (203,356) $
Net Book
Value
55,769
10,250
9,105
423,903
27,866
526,893
As of September 30, 2000, Plant, Property and Equipment consisted of the following:
Superfund
All Others
Acquisition Accumulated
Value Depreciation
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) $
Net Book Acquisition Accumulated
Value Value Depreciation
8,420 $
0
5,161
0
0
13,581 $
134,893 ?
550
34,103
461,817
40,992
672,355 ?
f (86,883) $
0
(27,551)
(73,430)
(11,463)
f (199,327) $
Net Book
Value
48,010
550
6,552
388,387
29,529
473,028
Note 10. Debt
The Debt consisted of the following as of September 30, 2001 and 2000:
All Others
Other Debt: Debt to Treasury
Classification of Debt:
Intragovernmental Debt
Total
Beginning
Balance
$ 37,922
FY 2001
Net
Borrowing
$ (6,798) $
$
$
Ending
Balance
31,124
31,124
31,124
Beginning
Balance
$ 37,922
FY 2000
Net
Borrowing
$ 0 $
$
$
Ending
Balance
37,922
37,922
37,922
Note 11. Custodial Liability
Custodial Liability represents 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.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements
IV-31
-------
Note 12. Other Liabilities
The Other Liabilities, both intragovernmental and non-Federal, for September 30, 2001 are as follows:
Covered by Not Covered by
Other Liabilities - Intragovernmental Budgetary Resources Budgetary Resources Total
Superfund - Current
Employer Contributions & Payroll Taxes
Other Advances
Advances, HRSTF Cashout
Deferred HRSTF Cashout
Resources Payable to Treasury
Superfund - Non-Current
Unfunded FECA Liability
Total Superfund
All Other - Current
Employer Contributions & Payroll Taxes
WCF Advances
Other Advances
Liability for Deposit Funds
Resources Payable to Treasury
Subsidy Payable to Treasury
All Other - Non-Current
Unfunded FECA Liability
Total All Other
Other Liabilities - Non-Federal
Superfund - Current
Unearned Advances, Non- Federal
Total Superfund
All Other - Current
Unearned Advances, Non- Federal
Deferred Credits
Liability for Deposit Funds, Non-Federal
All Other - Non-Current
Capital Lease Liability
Total All Other
$ 2,682
1,045
15,208
947
0
0
$ 19,882
$ 11,935
5,355
2,646
(85)
2
1,313
0
$ 21,166
Covered by
Budgetary Resources
$ 27,659
$ 27,659
$ 4,275
0
19,331
0
$ 23,606
0
0
0
0
0
1,426
$ 1,426
$ 0
0
0
0
0
0
6,341
$ 6,341
Not Covered by
Budgetary Resources
0
$ o
$ o
0
0
36,930
$ 36,930
$ 2,682
1,045
15,208
947
0
1,426
$ 21,308
$ 11,935
5,355
2,646
(85)
2
1,313
6,341
$ 27,507
Total
27,659
$ 27,659
$ 4,275
0
19,331
36,930
$ 60,536
IV-32 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
The Other Liabilities, both intragovernmental and non-Federal, for September 30, 2000, are as follows:
Other Liabilities - Intragovernmental
Covered by
Budgetary Resources
Not Covered by
Budgetary Resources
Other Liabilities - Non-Federal
Covered by
Budgetary Resources
Not Covered by
Budgetary Resources
Total
Superfund - Current
Employer Contributions & Payroll Taxes
Other Advances
Advances, HRSTF Cashout
Deferred HRSTF Cashout
Resources Payable to Treasury
Superfund - Non-Current
Unfunded FECA Liability
Total Superfund
All Other - Current
Employer Contributions & Payroll Taxes
WCF Advances
Other Advances
Liability for Deposit Funds
Resources Payable to Treasury
All Other - Non-Current
Unfunded FECA Liability
Total All Other
$ 2,900 i
1,681
2,414
437
61
0
$ 7,493 i
$ 12,690 i
6,510
3,638
(20)
(33)
0
$ 22,785 i
J o
0
0
0
0
1,355
J 1,355
J 0
0
0
0
0
6,064
£ 6,064
$ 2,900
1,681
2,414
437
61
1,355
$ 8,848
$ 12,690
6,510
3,638
(20)
(33)
6,064
$ 28,849
Total
Superfund - Current
Unearned Advances, Non- Federal
Total Superfund
All Other - Current
Unearned Advances, Non- Federal
Deferred Creditss
Liability for Deposit Funds, Non-Federal
All Other - Non-Current
Capital Lease Liability
Total All Other
30,192
30,192
4,729
6,833
0
37,585
11,562
37,585
30,192
30,192
4,729
6,833
37,585
49,147
* For FY 2000, the Other Liabilities - non-Federal category included amounts reported separately in FY 2001 as "Payroll and Benefits
Payable." The portion of this note for FY 2000 is re-stated accordingly. See Note 33 for items included in the Other Liabilities, non-Federal
category, in FY 2000 statements.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements
IV-33
-------
Note 13. Leases
The Capital Leases as of September 30, 2001 and 2000, consist of the following:
Capital Leases, All Other Funds:
Summary of Assets Under Capital Lease: FY 2001 FY 2000
Real Property
Personal Property
Total
Accumulated Amortization
$ 40,913 $
79
$ 40,992 $
$ 13,126 $
40,913
79
40,992
11,463
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 that expires in FY 2002. The 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:
Future Payments Due: All Others
Fiscal Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
After 5 Years
Total Future Minimum Lease Payments
Less: Imputed Interest
Difference in Lease Payments to be corrected FY 2002
Net Capital Lease Liability
Liabilities not Covered by Budgetary Resources (See Note 12)
$ 6,303
6,295
6,295
6,295
6,295
89,899
121,382
(84,461)
9
$ 36,930
$ 36,930
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 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
IV-34 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
escalators in the Consumer Price Indices published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (U.S. Department of Labor).
Two of these operating leases expire in FY 2002. Two others expire in fiscal years 2017 and 2020. Respectively, the
fifth lease expired in FY 2001 and is extended on a monthly basis. The charges are expended out of the EPM
appropriation. The total minimum future costs of operating leases are listed below.
Fiscal Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Beyond 2006
Total Future Minimum Lease Payments
Superfund
$ o :
0
0
0
0
0
$ o :
Total Land
All Others & Buildings
J 2,102 $
74
74
74
74
920
£ 3,318 $
2,102
74
74
74
74
920
3,318
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 the Department of Labor.
The FECA Actuarial Liability at September 30, 2001 and 2000, consisted of the following:
FY 2001
FY 2000
Superfund
All Other
Superfund
All Other
FECAActuarial Liability
7,731
31,902
6,637
27,036
The FY 2001 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.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements
IV-35
-------
Note 16. Unexpended Appropriations
As of September 30, 2001 and 2000, the Unexpended Appropriations consisted of the following for
All Other Funds:
Unexpended Appropriations: FY 2001 FY 2000
Unobligated
Available
Unavailable
Undelivered Orders
Total
$ 1,635,071
64,930
8,658,960
$ 10,358,961
$ 1,518,675
83,396
8,517,767
$ 10,119,838
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, 2001 and 2000. The amounts contained in these statements have been provided by the Treasury
and are audited. Outlays represent amounts received by EPAs Superfund Trust Fund; such funds are eliminated
on consolidation with the Superfund Trust Fund maintained by Treasury.
IV-36 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
SUPERFUND FY2001
EPA
Treasury
Combined
Undistributed Balances
Available for Investment
Unavailable for Investment
Total Undisbursed Balance
Interest Receivable
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
Transfers to CDC
Total Outlays
Net Income
$ 0
0
0
0
2,837,243
$ 2,837,243
$ 0
2,837,243
$ 2,837,243
$ 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,227,360
0
1,227,360
$ 1,227,360
$ 768
0
768
59,891
826,910
$ 887,569
$ 0
887,569
$ 887,569
$ 2,471
(12)
0
32
5
3,861
202,132
2,112
210,601
633,603
220,504
1,064,708
(1,227,360)
(74,835)
(1,302,195)
$ (237,487)
$ 768
0
768
59,891
3,664,153
$ 3,724,812
$ 0
3,724,812
$ 3,724,812
$ 2,471
(12)
0
32
5
3,861
202,132
2,112
210,601
633,603
220,504
1,064,708
0
(74,835)
(74,835)
$ 989,873
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements
IV-37
-------
SUPERFUND FY2000
EPA
Treasury
Combined
Undistributed Balances
Available for Investment
Unavailable for Investment
Total Undisbursed Balance
Interest Receivable
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
1,986
0
1,986
0
0
0
2,770,969
$ 2,770,969
$ 0
2,770,969
$ 2,770,969
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
_0
0
0
0
1,628,891
1,628,891
1,628,891
1,986
43
1,189,301
$ 1,191,330
$ 0
1,191,330
$ 1,191,330
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)
(456,850)
1,986
43
3,960,270
3,962,299
0
3,962,299
3,962,299
176
2
(561)
2,166
606
2,679
230,508
725
236,301
700,000
235,740
1,172,041
1,172,041
LUST (Audited)
LUST is supported primarily by a sales tax on motor fuels to clean up LUST waste sites. In FY 2001
$40 thousand of the fund's receipts were from cost recoveries. 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.
IV-38 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
FISCAL YEAR 2001 LUST
EPA
Treasury
Combined
Undistributed Balances
Available for Investment
Unavailable for Investment
Total Undisbursed Balance
Taxes Receivable
Interest Receivable
Investments, Net of Discounts
Total Assets
Liabilities & Equity
Accrued Liabilities
Equity
Total Liability and Equity
Receipts
Highway TF Tax
Airport TF Tax
Inland TF Tax
Refund Gasoline Tax
Refund Diesel Tax
Refund Aviation Tax
Refund Aviation Fuel Tax
Cost Recovery
Audit Adjustment
Gross Revenue
Less: Reimbursement to General Fund
Net Revenue
Interest Income
Net Receipts
Outlays
Transfers to EPA
Total Outlays
Net Income
$ 0
0
0
0
0
83,460
$ 83,460
$ 0
83,460
$ 83,460
$ 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
74,617
74,617
$ 74,617
$ 12,211
0
12,211
0
22,358
1,673,000
$ 1,707,569
$ 0
1,707,569
$ 1,707,569
$ 167,408
16,114
582
(834)
(1,584)
(19)
(123)
40
0
181,584
0
181,584
94,802
276,386
(74,617)
(74,617)
$ 201,769
$ 12,211
0
12,211
0
22,358
1,756,460
$ 1,791,029
$ 0
1,791,029
$ 1,791,029
$ 167,408
16,114
582
(834)
(1,584)
(19)
(123)
40
0
181,584
0
181,584
94,802
276,386
0
0
$ 276,386
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements
IV-39
-------
FISCAL YEAR 2000 LUST
EPA
Treasury
Combined
Undistributed Balances
Available for Investment
Unavailable for Investment
Total Undisbursed Balance
Taxes Receivable
Interest Receivable
Investments, Net of Discounts
Total Assets
Liabilities & Equity
Accrued Liabilities
Equity
Total Liability and Equity
Receipts
Highway TF Tax
Airport TF Tax
Inland TF Tax
Audit Adjustment
Gross Revenue
Less: Reimbursement toGeneral Fund
Net Revenue
Interest Income
Net Receipts
Outlays
Transfers to EPA
Total Outlays
Net Income
$ 0
0
0
0
0
86,283
$ 86,283
$ 0
86,283
$ 86,283
$ 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
65,718
65,718
$ 65,718
$ (725)
0
(725)
221
26
1,506,348
$ 1,505,870
$ 2,892
1,502,978
$ 1,505,870
$ 172,659
16,380
612
(1,710)
187,941
(6,625)
181,316
78,956
260,272
(65,718)
(65,718)
$ 194,554
$ (725)
0
(725)
221
26
1,592,631
$ 1,592,153
$ 2,892
1,589,261
$ 1,592,153
$ 172,659
16,380
612
(1,710)
187,941
(6,625)
181,316
78,956
260,272
0
0
$ 260,272
IV-40 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Note 18. Commitments and Contingencies
EPA may be 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.
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 three CERCLA §106(b) administrative claims and one pending lawsuit. If the claimants are
successful, the total losses on the administrative and judicial claims could amount to approximately $25.8 million and
$3.8 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 three of these outstanding claims overall is characterized as reasonably possible. The claimants' chance
of success in the pending lawsuit is also reasonably possible.
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, 2001, $3.8 million of Superfund related claims and $6.0 million of All Other funds'
claims were accrued as contingent liabilities under these criteria. Other contingent liabilities exist under 27 cases
of which anticipated amounts for attorney fees alone cannot be estimated or known at this time. These amounts
are believed to be less than material.
In addition, EPA is party to certain pending litigation upon which EPA believes it has a reasonable legal
position. $25.6 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.
www.epa.gov/ocfo FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-41
-------
Note 19. Grant Accrual
The EPA has revised the methodology for calculating the accrued grant expense for the Fiscal Year 2001
financial statements using a model based on historical grant payments and a survey of major grantees on billing
practices. Average days of accrual at year end for sample grantees were determined from survey results and were
used with average daily billings as determined by historical payment data to project the year end accrual for the
sample group. The accrual for the sample group was then projected to provide the year end accrual for all
grants. For FY 2001, the accrual for Superfund is $16.9 million and the All Other grant accrual is $476.7 million.
IN FY 2000, the accrual for Superfund was $43.0 million and the All Other accrual was $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
The EPA has four sites that require clean up stemming from its activities. Costs amounting to $98 thousand
for three of these sites will be paid out of the Treasury Judgement Fund. (The $98 thousand represents the
lower end of three separate range estimates, of which the maximum of the ranges would total $110 thousand.)
EPA estimates cleanup on the one other site will cost approximately $20 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 General Services Administration will bear all or most of the cost of remediation.
Accrued Cleanup Cost
The EPA has 14 sites that will require future clean up associated with permanent closure and one site with
clean up presently underway. The estimated costs will be approximately $14.5 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 and record changes to the estimate in subsequent years.
The FY 2001 estimate for unfunded cleanup costs decreased by $5.8 million from the FY 2000 estimate.
This represents a change of approximately 41 percent due in large part to the funding of cleanup at several
Research Triangle Park (RTP) facilities associated with the ongoing consolidation at RTP Of the $14.5 million
in estimated cleanup costs, approximately $9.5 million represents the estimated expense to close the current
RTP facility. These costs will be incurred within the next two years. The remaining amount represents the future
decontamination and decommissioning costs of EPAs other research facilities. There was a net increase of
approximately $4.8 million in funded cleanup costs from FY 2000 to FY 2001. EPA could also be potentially
liable for cleanup costs, at a GSA-leased site; however, the amounts are not known.
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, 2001, total remaining State credits have been estimated at $10.7 million.
The estimated ending credit balance on September 30, 2000 was $12.6 million.
IV-42 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
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) 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, 2001, EPA had 15 outstanding preauthorized mixed funding agreements with
obligations totaling $41.1 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 Appropriations
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 2001, EPA had one appropriation 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.
All of the expenses from EPM 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.
FY2001
Income Expenses
From Other From Other
Appropriations Appropriations
FY2000
Income Expenses
Net From Other From Other Net
Effect Appropriations Appropriations Effect
Superfund
All Others
Total
103,654
(103,654)
(103,654)
103,654
0 $
31,270
(31,270)
(31,270)
31,270
0 $
0 $
0 $
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements
IV-43
-------
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.
FY2001
FY2000
Fines, Penalties and Other Misc Revenue (EPA)
Accounts Receivable for Fines, Penalties
and Other Miscellaneous Receipts
Accounts Receivable
Less: Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
Total
121,892
123,966
46,186
77,780
86,590
154,803
52,336
102,467
Note 25. Statement of Budgetary Resources
Reconciliations of budgetary resources, obligations incurred, and outlays, as presented in the audited
Statements of Budgetary Resources, to amounts included in the Budget of the United States Government for
the years ended September 30, 2001 and 2000, are as follows:
FY 2001
Budgetary Obligations
Resources Incurred Outlays
SUPERFUND
Statement of Budgetary Resources
Adjustments to Unliquidated Obligations,
Unfilled Customer Orders and Other
2,284,377 $ 1,570,056 $ 1,199,748
(3,650) 13,813 0
Budget of the United States Government
ALL OTHER
Statement of Budgetary Resources
Less: Funds Reported by Other Federal Entities
Adjustments to Unliquidated Obligations,
Unfilled Customer Orders and Other
Budget of the United States Government
FY 2000
$ 2,280,727
$ 9,343,106
(26,148)
(5,229)
$ 9,311,729
Budgetary
Resources
$ 1,583,869 $
$ 7,431,802 $
(25,677)
(5,229)
$ 7,400,896 $
Obligations
Incurred
1,199,748
7,015,605
(25,342)
0
6,990,263
Outlays
SUPERFUND
Statement of Budgetary Resources
Adjustments to Unliquidated Obligations,
Unfilled Customer Orders and Other
Budget of the United States Government
ALL OTHER
Statement of Budgetary Resources
Less: Funds Reported by Other Federal Entities
Adjustments to Unliquidated Obligations,
Unfilled Customer Orders and Other
Budget of the United States Government
2,151,875 $ 1,701,337 $ 1,526,587
(328) (1,744) 1,000
2,151,547 $ 1,699,593 $ 1,527,587
8,932,823
(24,778)
66,618
8,974,663
7,158,665
(23,835)
67,907
7,202,737
6,602,265
(24,545)
57
6,577,777
IV-44 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Note 26. Adjustments
Adjustments for FY2001and FY2000 are represented by the following categories:
FY 2001 FY 2000
SUPERFUND
Recoveries of Prior Year Obligations
Less: Cancelled Authority
Total
ALL OTHERS
Recoveries of Prior Year Obligations
Adjustments to Beginning Unobligated Balances
Less: Payments to Treasury
Rescinded Authority
Canceled Authority
Total
$ 196,644
0
$ 196,644
$ 76,815 :
0
(6,798)
(15,668)
(36,254)
$ 18,095
$ 201,660
2,288
$ 199,372
I 111,767
615
0
(28,848)
(55,687
$ 27,847
Note 27. Unobligated Balances Available
Availability of unobligated balances ae shown comparatively for FY 2001 and FY 2000. 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.
FY 2001 FY 2000
SUPERFUND
Unexpired Unobligated Balance $ 714,321 $ 449,538
Expired Unobligated Balance 0 1,000
Total $ 714,321 $ 450,538
ALL OTHERS
Unexpired Unobligated Balance $ 1,791,475 $ 1,644,998
Expired Unobligated Balance 119,829 129,160
Total $ 1,911,304 $ 1,774,158
Note 28. Obligated Balance, Net - End of Period
The following unpaid undelivered orders are included in the Obligated Balance, Net - End of Period for
FY 2001 and FY 2000.
FY 2001 FY 2000
SUPERFUND
Undelivered Orders, Unpaid $ 1,915,743 $ 2,091,767
ALL OTHERS
Undelivered Orders, Unpaid $ 8,787,505 $ 8,657,913
www.epa.gov/ocfo FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-45
-------
Note 29. Statement 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 are reflected in Financing Sources Yet to Be Provided.
FY 2001 FY 2000
FINANCING SOURCES YET TO BE PROVIDED
Superfund $
All Others
Total $
829 $
8,234
9,063 $
6,980
12,262
19,242
Note 30. Costs Not Assigned to Goals
FY 2001's Statement of Net Cost by Goal has $(31.5) million in gross costs not assigned to goals. Grant
accruals are part of the "Costs Not Assigned to Goals." The FY 2001 amount is comprised of a decrease of
$57.0 million to the year-end grant accruals (see Note 19); partially offset by $19.7 million in bad debt expense
not assigned to goals, $2.4 million in interest on Treasury borrowing, $3.1 million in undistributed imputed
costs, and $0.3 million in miscellaneous expenses.
For FY 2000's 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 31. Transfers-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. Elimination transactions consist of intra-agency transfers
between EPA funds.
Note 32. 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. These 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. The estimates for FY 2001 were
$13.4 million and $76.5 million for Superfund and All Other Funds, respectively. For FY 2000, the revised
estimates (see Note 34) were $12.5 million and $70.4 million for Superfund and All Other Funds, respectively.
In addition to the pension and retirement benefits described above, in FY 2001 EPA also recorded imputed
costs and financing for Treasury Judgement Fund payments on behalf of the agency. Entries are in accordance
with the Interpretation of Federal Financial Accounting Standards No. 2, Accounting for Treasury Judgement
Fund Transactions. These entries totaled $0.3 million and $1.3 million for Superfund and All Other Funds,
respectively.
IV-46 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Note 33. Payroll and Benefits Payable
The amounts that relate to payroll and benefits payable to EPA employees for the years ending September
30, 2001 and 2000 are detailed in the following tables. For FY 2000, these amounts were included with Other
Liabilities, non-Federal. The FY 2000 portion of this note has been drawn from the prior year's note on Other
Liabilities.
FY 2001 Payroll and Benefits Payables
Covered by Budgetary
Resources
Not Covered by
Budgetary Resources
Total
Superfund - Current
Accrued Funded Payroll and Benefits
Withholdings Payable
Employer Contributions Payable, non Federal (TSP)
Other Post-employment Benefits Payable
Accrued Unfunded Annual Leave
Total - Superfund - Current
All Other Funds - Current
Accrued Funded Payroll and Benefits
Withholdings Payable
Employer Contributions Payable, non Federal (TSP)
Other Post-employment Benefits Payable
Accrued Funded Leave, WCF
Accrued Unfunded Annual Leave
Total - All Other Funds - Current
FY 2000 Payroll and Benefits Payables
Superfund - Current
Accrued Funded Payroll and Benefits
Withholdings Payable
Other Post-employment Benefits Payable
Accrued Unfunded Annual Leave
Total - Superfund - Current
All Other Funds - Current
Accrued Funded Payroll and Benefits
Withholdings Payable
Other Post-employment Benefits Payable
Accrued Funded Leave, WCF
Accrued Unfunded Annual Leave
Total - All Other Funds - Current
$ 8,361
5,935
372
3
0
$ 14,671
$ 37,099
26,410
1,645
33
320
0
$ 65,507
Covered by Budgetary
Resources
$ 7,499
5,777
3
0
$ 13,279
$ 32,570
25,278
44
320
0
$ 58,212
$ 0
0
0
0
20,440
$ 20,440
$ 0
0
0
0
0
98,223
$ 98,223
Not Covered by
Budgetary Resources
$ 0
0
0
19,553
$ 19,553
$ 0
0
0
0
93,151
$ 93,151
$ 8,361
5,935
372
o
J
20,440
$ 35,111
$ 37,099
26,410
1,645
33
320
98,223
$ 163,730
Total
$ 7,499
5,777
3
19,553
$ 32,832
$ 32,570
25,278
44
320
93,151
$ 151,363
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements
IV-47
-------
Note 34. Restatement of Imputed Costs and Financing for Prior Years
In fiscal years 1998,1999, and 2000, the imputed costs and financing recognized on EPA's financial statements
differed from the calculations stipulated in OPM's Financial Management Letters issued annually. Because these
errors resulted in offsetting differences in costs and financing sources, they had no effect on Net Position. However,
Intragovernmental Costs on the Statement of Net Cost and Imputed Financing on the Statements of Changes in Net
Position and Financing were misstated for those fiscal years. The table below shows the differences in thousands for
each fiscal year.
Superfund:
Corrected Amounts
Amounts on Statements
Difference
All Other:
Corrected Amounts
Amounts on Statements
Difference
Imputed Costs and
and Financing
for FY 1998
$ 12,422
30,155
$ (17,733)
$ 74,970
161,853
$ (86,883)
Imputed Costs
and Financing
for FY 1999
$ 12,851
31,437
$ (18,586)
$ 71,839
165,232
$ (93,393)
Imputed Costs
and Financing
for FY 2000
$ 12,534
32,063
$ (19,529)
$ 70,384
168,659
$ (98,275)
In accordance with the Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standard No. 21 (Reporting Corrections
of Errors and Changes in Accounting Principles), the amounts for imputed costs and financing are restated in
the Statements of Net Cost, the Statement of Changes in Net Position, and the Statement of Financing
presented for FY 2000. Since this error has no effect on Net Position, the beginning Net Position does not need
to be restated for either FY 2000 or FY 2001. The effect on the applicable lines of FY 2000's statements, in
thousands, is presented below:
Statement of Net Cost:
Costs: Intragovernmental
Total Costs
Net Cost of Operations
Statement of Changes in
Net Position:
Net Cost of Operations
Imputed Financing
Statement of Financing:
Imputed Financing for
Cost Subsidies
Net Cost of Operations
Superfund
FY2000
Statements
$ 373,311 :
$ 1,664,045 :
$ 1,356,845 :
$ 1,356,845 :
$ 32,063 :
$ 32,063 :
$ 1,356,845 :
All
Superfund Other
FY2000 FY2000
Restated Difference Statements
I 353,782 $
I 1,644,516 $
I 1,337,316 $
I 1,337,316 $
$ 12,534 $
1 12,534 $
I 1,337,316 $
19,529 $ 787,415 j
19,529 $ 6,223,482 j
19,529 $ 6,131,604 j
19,529 $ 6,131,604 j
19,529 $ 168,659 j
19,529 $ 168,659 j
19,529 $ 6,131,604 j
All Consolidated
Other FY2000
FY2000 Total
Restated Difference Difference
f 689,140 $
f 6,125,207 $
f 6,033,329 $
f 6,033,329 $
f 70,384 $
f 70,384 $
f 6,033,329 $
98,275 $
98,275 $
98,275 $
98,275 $
98,275 $
98,275 $
98,275 $
117,804
117,804
117,804
117,804
117,804
117,804
117,804
IV-48 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
The amounts reduced (in thousands) on the restated Statement of Net Costs by Goal for FY 2000 are:
Clean Air
Clean and Safe Water
Safe Food
Prevent Pollution
Better Waste Management
Global Risks
Right to Know
Sound Science
Credible Deterrent
Effective Management
Intragovernmental
Costs
$ 11,793
18,672
4,914
7,862
27,209
3,931
5,109
6,879
17,292
14,143
Management
Cost Allocations
$ 1,633 }
2,245
665
1,061
4,127
481
695
937
2,299
(14,143)
Net Cost of
Operations
£ 13,426
20,917
5,579
8,923
31,336
4,412
5,804
7,816
19,591
0
Total Reduction $ 117,804 $ 0 $ 117,804
Note 35. Change in Accounting for Trust Funds in FY 2000
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. As of FY 2000, 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 affected 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 balances as of October 1, 1999 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 for fiscal year 2000. 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
www.epa.gov/ocfo FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-49
-------
Note 36. Change in Accounting for Cashout Interest, Superfund for FY 2000
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. Prior to FY 2000, 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 and 2001, interest earnings that became available during the fiscal years 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. Current year's earnings are included as Budget Authority on the
Combined Statement of Budgetary Resources for Superfund.
Note 37. Change in Accounting for Expenditure Transfers
In fiscal year 2000, Treasury implemented changes in accounting for expenditure transfers from trust funds
to eligible fund symbols. These changes allowed the transfers to be recorded as financing sources rather than
unexpended or expended appropriations. In addition, new receivable and payable accounts provided the
mechanism to record invested financing sources available to cover expenditures until the actual transfers could
be completed at a later date.
In accordance with this change, in FY 2001 EPA established new intra-agency accounts receivable and
payable accounts for transfers between Superfund and the IG and Science & Technology funds. For
comparative purposes, the FY 2000 Balance Sheet and Statement of Changes in Net Position are restated to
show $46.5 million of activity that reflects the cumulative effect of these new accounts. Specifically, the All
Others intragovernmental receivables and the Superfund intragovernmental accounts payable were both
increased by $46.5 million for FY 2000, with offsetting amounts reported in the respective cumulative results of
operations on the Balance Sheet. On the Statement of Changes in Net Position, an accounting change for FY
2000 was reported which restated ending net position for Superfund and All Others for FY 2000. Of this
change, $45.2 million represents the beginning balance changes for FY 2000 and $1.3 million was added to All
Others transfers-in and Superfund transfers-out to reflect the changes in activity relating solely to FY 2000.
IV-50 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2001
(Dollars in Thousands)
(Unaudited)
Deferred Maintenance
The EPA classifies tangible 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.
Intragovernmental 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 2001).
EPA confirmed its investment balances with the Bureau of the Public Debt, Department of the Treasury. In
addition, EPA sent out requests to trading partners to reconcile and confirm intragovernmental receivables and
transfers. Responses or inquiries were received from the Department of Defense, Department of the Interior,
Department of Commerce, Department of the Treasury, Nuclear RegulatoryCommissionandtheNational Science
Foundation.
Trading
Partner
Code
04
11
12
13
14
15
17
18
19
20
21
45
47
49
57
58
61
64
68
69
72
75
80
Investments
Agency Superfund All Other
Government Printing Office $ 0 $ 0
Executive Office of the President
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
Department of Interior
Department of Justice
Department of the Navy
U.S. Postal Service
Department of State
Department of the Treasury
Department of the Army
Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission
General Services Administration
National Science Foundation
Department of the Air Force
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Consumer Product Safety Commission
Tennessee Valley Authority
EPA (between Superfund and All Other)
Department of Transportation
Agency for International Development
Department of Health and
Human Services
National Aeronautics and
Space Administration
Accounts
Receivable
Superfund All
$ 0 $
425
17
13,539
81
111
16
75
8,806
175
604
245
Other
0
11
97
96
794
810
154
104
127
121
36
14
110
957
1
15
48,128
8,927
1,937
868
39
Other
Superfund All Other
$ 56 $ 1,529
2 27
122
2,418
5,448 291
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements
IV-51
-------
Trading
Partner
Code Agency
86 Department of Housing and
Urban Development
89 Department of Energy
96 US Army Corps of Engineers
97 US Department of Defense
99 Treasury Managed Trust Funds
00 Unassigned
Total
Investments
Superfund All Other
3,724,044 1,778,818
0 0
$ 3,724,044 $1,778,818
Accounts
Receivable
Superfund All
85
87
6,912
0
$ 31,178 $
Other
149
469
4,460
219
1,313
21
69,977
Other
Superfund All
15
$c co-i q>
3,321 |
Other
(1)
4,386
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 Department of Commerce (13),
Tennessee Valley Authority (64), the Office of Personnel Management (24), the Department of the Treasury
(20), and the Department of Labor (16).
Trading
Partner Accounts Payable
Code
03
04
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
24
31
33
45
47
49
56
57
58
64
68
69
73
75
80
Agency Superfund All Other
Library of Congress $ 0 $ 0
Government Printing Office
Executive Office of the President
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce 1,035
Department of Interior 901
Department of Justice 617
Department of Labor 2,258
Department of the Navy
United States Postal Service
Department of State
Department of the Treasury
Department of the Army
Office of Personnel Management
US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Smithsonian Institution
EEOC
General Services Administration
National Science Foundation
Central Intelligence Agency
Department of the Air Force
Federal Emergency Management
Agency 15,317
Tennessee Valley Authority
EPA (between Superfund and All Others) 44,759 512
Department of Transportation
Small Business Administration
Department of Health and
Human Services 16
National Aeronautics and
Space Administration
Accrued Liabilities Other Liabilities
Superfund
$ 6
45
68
699
4,611
3,418
53
218
41
45
6
3,619
7
16
1
3,241
6,287
12,793
All Other Superfund
$ 157 $ 0
1,146
26
1,199 2,085
2,071
2,593
50 1,067
43 1,426
440 102
7 14
628
226
3,258
426 1,964
6
31
20
17,258 6,875
241
21
2,760
198
141
10
6,639
212
All Other
$ 0
(6)
48
140
81
6,341
24
8,742
20
(87)
45
16
5,355
IV-52 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Trading
Partner Accounts Payable
Code
86
88
89
91
95
96
97
99
00
Total
Agency Superfund All Other
Department of Housing and
Urban Development
National Archives & Records Administration
Department of Energy
Department of Education
IndependentAgencies
US Army Corps of Engineers 881 422
Office of the Secretary of Defense 3 125
Treasury General Fund
Unassigned 22 59
$ 65,809 $ 1,118
Accrued Liabilities
Superfund
392
11
21,381
770
$ 57,728
All Other
4
1
4,537
4
8
1,287
174
737
$ 40,541
Other Liabilities
Superfund
1,044
690
23
$ 21,308
All Other
1,849
47
331
56
4,507
(2)
$ 27,507
For All Other Funds' remaining intragovernmental liabilities, $31,124 thousand in Debt is assigned to the
Department of the Treasury (trading partner Code 20), and $77,778 thousand in Custodial Liability is assigned
to the Treasury General Fund (trading partner Code 99).
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
Associated Costs to generate Above Revenue
(Budget Functional Classification 304)
37,241
37,241
57,444
57,444
www.epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements
IV-53
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT OF BUDGETARY RESOURCES
AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2001
(Dollars in Thousands)
Unaudited
Environ-
mental
Programs &
STAG Management
Budgetary Resources:
Budget Authority $
Unobligated Balances -
Beginning of the Period
Net Transfers,
Prior Year Balance
Spending Authority from
Offsetting Collections
Adjustments
Total Budgetary Resources $
Status of Budgetary Resources:
Obligations Incurred $
Unobligated Balances -
Available
Unobligated Balances-
Not Available
Budgetary Resources $
Outlays:
Obligations Incurred $
Less: Spending Authority from
from Offsetting Collections
and Adjustments
Obligated Balance, Net -
Beginning of the Period
Less: Obligated Balance, Net -
End of the Period
Total Outlays $
f 3,649,325
1,218,633
0
29,855
27,154
f 4,924,967
f 3,625,653
1,299,314
0
f 4,924,967
f 3,625,653
64,992
7,874,156
7,917,132
f 3,517,685
$ 2,091,490
270,917
1,107
51,154
(14,349)
$ 2,400,319
$ 2,093,381
214,529
92,409
$ 2,400,319
$ 2,093,381
70,515
750,109
783,265
$ 1,989,710
Science &
Technology
$ 697,000
180,150
0
37,592
844
$ 915,586
$ 714,645
175,274
25,667
$ 915,586
$ 714,645
46,657
500,950
492,591
$ 676,347
LUST
FIFRA Trust Fund
$ 0
4,596
0
15,701
196
$ 20,493
$ 18,576
1,917
0
$ 20,493
$ 18,576
15,897
1,544
1,547
$ 2,676
$ 71,795
4,331
0
40
2,290
$ 78,456
$ 72,236
6,134
86
$ 78,456
$ 72,236
2,330
83,976
83,186
$ 70,696
Misc. Consolidated
All All
Other Other
$ 736,268
95,531
(104)
169,630
1,960
$1,003,285
$ 907,311
94,307
1,667
$1,003,285
$ 907,311
180,395
78,709
47,134
$ 758,491
$ 7,245,878
1,774,158
1,003
303,972
18,095
$ 9,343,106
$ 7,431,802
1,791,475
119,829
$ 9,343,106
$ 7,431,802
380,786
9,289,444
9,324,855
$ 7,015,605
IV-54 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
WORKING CAPITAL FUND
SUPPLEMENTAL BALANCE SHEET
AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2001
(Dollars in Thousands)
ASSETS
Intragovernmental:
Fund Balance With Treasury
Accounts Receivable, Net
Other
Total Intragovernmental
Inventory and Related Property, Net
General Property, Plant and Equipment, Net
Other
Total Assets
LIABILITIES
Intragovernmental:
Accrued Liabilities
Advances from Other EPA Funds
Other
Total Intragovernmental
Accounts Payable
Accrued Liabilities
Other
Total Liabilities
Unaudited
51,267
20,332
121
71,720
14
14,353
2
86,089
1,987
37,422
94
39,503
2,746
13,287
1,845
57,381
NET POSITION
Cumulative Results of Operations
Total Net Position
Total Liabilities and Net Position
28,708
28,708
86,089
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements
IV-55
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
WORKING CAPITAL FUND
SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT OF NET COST
FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001
(Dollars in Thousands)
Unaudited
COSTS:
Intragovernmental $ 15,409
With the Public 104,190
Total Costs 119,599
Less:
Earned Revenues (124,819)
Net Cost of Operations $ (5,220)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
WORKING CAPITAL FUND
SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET POSITION
FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001
(Dollars in Thousands)
Unaudited
Net Cost of Operations $ 5,220
Financing Sources
(Other Than Exchange Revenues):
Imputed Financing 1,704
Transfers-In 0
Transfers-Out 0
Net Results of Operations $ 6,924
Prior-Period Adjustments 0
Net Change in Cumulative
Results of Operations $ 6,924
Net Position - Beginning of the Period 21,784
Net Position - End of the Period $ 28,708
IV-56 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
WORKING CAPITAL FUND
SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT OF BUDGETARY RESOURCES
FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001
(Dollars in Thousands)
Budgetary Resources
Unobligated Balances, Beginning of the Period
Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections
Adjustments
Total Budgetary Resources
Status of Budgetary Resources
Obligations Incurred
Unobligated Balances Available
Total, Status of Budgetary Resources
Outlays
Obligations Incurred
Less: Spending Authority from
Offsetting Collections and Adjustments
Subtotal
Obligated Balance, Net - Beginning of the Period
Less: Obligated Balance, Net - End of the Period
Total Outlays
Unaudited
21,820
125,706
2,990
150,516
127,482
23,034
150,516
127,482
(128,696)
(1,214)
30,688
(28,232)
1,242
www. epa.gov/ocfo
FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements
IV-57
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
WORKING CAPITAL FUND
SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT OF FINANCING
FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001
(Dollars in Thousands)
Obligations and Nonbudgetary Resources Unaudited
Obligations Incurred $ 127,482
Less: Spending Authority for Offsetting Collections and Adjustments
Earned Reimbursements
Collected (125,394)
Receivable from Federal Sources 49 8
Change in Unfilled Orders - (Decreases)TIncreases (810)
Recoveries from Prior Year Obligations (2,990)
Financing Imputed for Cost Subsidies 1,704
Total Obligations as Adjusted and Nonbudgetary Resources $ 490
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 (2,256)
Change in Unfilled Customers Orders, etc. - Increases/(Decreases) 810
Costs Capitalized on the Balance Sheet
General Plant, Property and Equipment (9,227)
Purchases of Inventory 32
Total Resources that Do Not Fund Net Costs of Operations $ (10,641)
Components of Costs of Operations that Do Not Require
or Generate Resources
Depreciation and Amortization 4,396
Loss on Dispoisition of Assets 124
Total Costs That Do Not Require Resources 4,520
Financing Sources Yet to be Provided 411
Net Costs of Operations $ (5,220)
IV-58 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTAL STEWARDSHIP INFORMATION
FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001
(Dollars in Thousands)
INVESTMENT IN THE NATION'S RESEARCH 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 priorities are research programs that address the effects of the environment on
children's health, the potential risks of unregulated contaminants in drinking water, the health effects of air
pollutants such as particulate matter, and the protection of the Nation's ecosystems. For FY 2001, the full cost
of the Agency's Research and Development activities totaled almost $646 million. Below is a breakout of the
expenses (dollars in thousands):
FY1998 FY1999 FY 2000 FY2001
Programmatic Expenses 507,828 543,777 541,117 555,794
Allocated Expenses 53,322 58,728 59,523 90,039
INVESTMENT IN THE NATION'S INFRASTRUCTURE
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.
www.epa.gov/ocfo FY 2001 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 FY1999 FY 2000 FY2001
Construction Grants 444,817 414,528 55,766 63,344
Clean Water SRF 1,109,017 925,744 1,564,894 1,548,270
Safe Drinking Water SRF 94,936 387,429 588,116 728,921
Other Infrastructure Grants 138,363 245,606 212,124 282,914
Allocated Expenses 187,649 213,117 266,299 424,999
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. A site with "land
acquired" may have more than one acquisition property. Sites are not counted as a withdrawal until all acquired
properties have been transferred.
As of September 30, 2001, the Agency possesses the following land and land rights:
Superfund Sites with Easements
Beginning Balance 25
Additions 4
Withdrawals 0
Ending Balance 29
Superfund Sites with Land Acquired
Beginning Balance 23
Additions 2
Withdrawals 0
Ending Balance 25_
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 FY1999 FY 2000 FY2001
Training and Awareness Grants 39,131 46,630 49,265 48,697
Fellowships 11,084 10,239 9,570 11,451
Allocated Expenses 5,273 6,142 6,472 9,744
IV-60 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
SUMMARY OF OIG'S AUDIT REPORT
Full Electronic version of complete audit report
at http://www.epa.gov/oigearth
www.epa.gov/ocfo FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-61
-------
INSPECTOR GENERAL'S REPORT ON EPA'S FISCAL 2001 AND 2000
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
We have audited the consolidating balance sheets of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, or
the Agency) and its subsidiary funds, the Superfund Trust Fund (Superfund) and All Other Appropriated Funds
(All Other), as of September 30, 2001 and 2000, and the related consolidating statements of net cost and
changes in net position, consolidated statements of net cost by goal, combined statements of financing, and
consolidated statements of custodial activity for the years then ended, and the related combined statement of
budgetary resources for the year ended September 30, 2001. These financial statements are the responsibility of
EPAs 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 (OMB) 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 mis statements. 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 amount undeterminable 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
EPAs financial statements. The OIG is organizationally independent with respect to all other aspects 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, 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 years ended September 30, 2001
and 2000, and budgetary resources as of and for the year ended September 30, 2001, 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 EPAs management as to their methods of preparing its Required Supplemental Stewardship
Information (RSSI), Required Supplemental Information, and Management Discussion and Analysis, and
1 The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund is included in the All Other Appropriated Funds column of the financial statements.
IV-62 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
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. OMB Bulletin No. 01-09, Form and Content of Agency Financial Statements, requires
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 (see Attachment 2 for 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, affected 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 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
www.epa.gov/ocfo FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-63
-------
certain matters discussed below involving the internal control and its operation that we consider to be
reportable conditions, although 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 2001
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 three
reportable conditions, as follows:
Implementation of Internal Use Software Standard
EPA did not implement Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standard (SFFAS) No. 10, Accounting
for Internal Use Software, until the end of fiscal 2001, even though the standard was applicable for the
entire fiscal year. In addition, some of the supporting documentation used to identify capitalized
software costs was insufficient to determine whether such costs exceeded the capitalization threshold.
Since EPA issued guidance for capitalizing internally developed software at the end of fiscal 2001, we do
not have recommendations.
EPA's Interagency Agreement Invoice Approval Process
Some EPA project officers did not fulfill oversight duties related to reviewing and approving
Interagency Agreement (TAG) invoices. We noted deficiencies in this area in prior reports, and we
continue to find instances where project offices at EPA's Headquarters and the 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.
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 the Integrated Financial Management System
(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 describes each of the above reportable conditions in more detail, our recommendations, and
Agency comments on actions that should be taken to correct these conditions.
IV-64 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Comparison of EPA'S FMFIA Report with Our Evaluation of Internal Controls
OMB Bulletin No. 01-02, Audit Requirementsfor Federal'FinancialStatements, 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. EPA
reports on Integrity Act decisions in EPA's Fiscal Year 2001 Annual Report. For a discussion on Agency reported
Integrity Act material weaknesses and corrective action strategy, please refer to EPA's Fiscal Year 2001 Annual
Report, Section III, FY 2001 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.
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 2001 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 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. In fiscal 2001, Office of Environmental Information (OEI) reported that it had developed
an approach to correct the information systems security weakness and plans to evaluate the
effectiveness of its guidance and security measures through continued testings and audits. 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 ManagementImprovementAct. The OMB guidance requires that we
evaluate compliance with Federal financial management system requirements, including the requirements
referred to in the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act (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.
www.epa.gov/ocfo FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-65
-------
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 disclose 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.
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'ManagementImprovement 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, which is described more fully in
Attachment 2.
In addition to the above instance of substantial noncompliance, we identified one other noncompliance,
related to reconciliation of intra-governmental transactions. However, this noncompliance does not meet the
definition of a substantial noncompliance as described in OMB guidance.
Attachment 2 provides additional details, as well as our recommendations and Agency comments on actions
that should be taken on these matters.
Appropriation Law Noncompliance
Since fiscal 1994, we have reported that EPA was not complying with appropriation law when making
disbursements for grants funded with more than one appropriation. Specifically, disbursements for these grants
were made using the oldest available funding (appropriation) first, which may or may not have been the
appropriation that benefitted from the work performed. Therefore, EPA was not in compliance with Title 31,
U.S. Code, Section 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 violates Title 31, U.S. Code, Section 1301 and is an
inappropriate method of charging, except in limited situations. In fiscal 2001, EPA adopted new procedures for
allocating costs on such grants for new awards, although existing grants are still being disbursed using the oldest
available funding first. Since EPA has issued guidance for new awards, and since the remaining obligated
balances will dissipate and the problem will be corrected, we are not making any recommendations. See
Attachment 3 for a description of the Agency's corrective action plans and milestones.
IV-66 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
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.
• Complying with SFFAS No. 4, including accounting for the cost to achieve goals and identifying and
allocating indirect costs.
• Accounting for capitalized property.
• Recording accrued liabilities for grants.
• IAG invoice approval process. Documenting EPAs IFMS.
• Complyingwith Federal financial management system security requirements.
• Accounting for payments for grants funded from multiple appropriations.
• Reviewing Agency user fees.
• Documentation and approval of journal vouchers.
• Timely repayment of Asbestos Loan Debt to Treasury.
• Automated application processing controls for the IFMS could not be assessed.
• Reconciliation of intra-governmental trans actions.
• Financial system security plans continue to be noncompliant.
Attachment 3, Status of Prior Audit Report Recommendations, 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 EPAs 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 many years.
In response to our inquiries on actions taken by the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (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
www.epa.gov/ocfo FY 2001 Annual Financial Statements IV-67
-------
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.
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 memorandums dated February 12 and 25,2002, the Comptroller responded to our draft report. The OCFO
generally concurred with our findings and is in process of implementing corrective actions. However, the OCFO
took exception to two issues, Managerial Cost Accounting and Internal Use Software.
The OCFO believes they are complying with the Managerial Cost Accounting Standard and is currently
preparing a response to the points raised in the Inspector General's December 12, 2001 memorandum to the
Administrator regarding the impasse over FFMIA compliance.
The OCFO acknowledged that SSFAS No. 10 was not implemented until the end of the fiscal year.
However, the OCFO believes by doing so, EPA was able to use the most recent guidance and develop more
accurate and complete costs. We do not agree with the OCFO, we found that some of the data and costs for
systems that were not capitalized were either incomplete or ambiguous.
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 to this report.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the management of EPA, OMB, and
Congress, and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
J
Paul C. Curtis
Financial Audit Division
Office of Inspector General
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
February 26,2002
IV-68 EPA's FY 2001 Annual Report www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Comprehensive Listing of
Program Evaluations
Affecting FY 2001 Performance
-------
APPENDIX A:
COMPREHENSIVE LISTING OF PROGRAM EVALUATIONS AFFECTING
FY 2001 PERFORMANCE
TITLE/SCOPE
Environmental Protection:
Wider Use of Advance
Technologies Can Improve
Emissions Monitoring
This report reviews the use and
development of monitoring tech-
nologies for measuring emissions
from stationary air sources and
point and nonpoint water sources
of pollution.
EPA GOAL/
OBJECTIVE
Goall
Objectives 1,
2, and 3
FINDINGS OF THE EVALUATION
Overall, the General Accounting Office
(GAO) found that commercially available
technologies could assist in monitoring
compliance with clean air regulations and in
identifying process and efficiency improve-
ments that could lead to decreased use of
raw materials and reduced emissions. Many
of these technologies, including those that
monitor criteria and toxic air pollutants,
provide continuous measurement of
emissions or of operating parameters that
correlate to emissions.
AUTHOR AND
LOCATION OF
THE REPORT
GAO
GAO-01-313
June 22, 2001
Located at
http: / / www.gao.gov
Air Pollution: EPA Should
Improve Oversight of Emissions
Reporting by Large Facilities
This report provides information
on (1) the steps that EPA and state
regulators take to verify that large
sources comply with their Title V or
state permit and the extent of
compliance found; (2) the steps that
regulators take to verify the
accuracy of emissions reports
submitted by large industrial sources
and the extent of errors found;
and (3) the steps that EPA is taking,
if any, to improve its oversight of
these processes.
Goall
Objectives 1,
2, and 3
EPA has taken three steps to improve its
oversight of facilities' compliance with
the Clean Air Act (CAA) but does not plan
to enhance its oversight of the states'
processes for reviewing large facilities'
emissions reports. First, the Agency is
training and encouraging personnel in its
regional offices and the states to conduct
intensive investigations. Second, EPA is
revising its strategy for monitoring facilities'
compliance with the CAA's requirements.
Third, in September 1998 the Agency
issued guidance encouraging large
facilities to use more reliable methods, such
as continuous emissions monitors and
source tests, to support certifications of
compliance with operating permits. This
guidance, however, was set aside by an
April 2000 court decision. EPA did not
appeal the decision and is currently
evaluating other regulatory options that
would achieve the same objective. EPA
performs limited oversight of states' efforts
to verify large facilities' emissions reports.
Although the Agency has encouraged its
regional offices to evaluate states' emissions
fee programs for major sources, it has not
asked them to evaluate the processes used
to verify emissions reports.
GAO
GAO-01-46
April 6, 2001
Located at
http: / / www.gao.gov
www. epa.gov/ocfo
A-l
-------
TITLE/SCOPE
Assessing the TMDL Approach
to Water Quality Management
(2001)
In the conference report accompany-
ing EPA's FY 2002 appropriations bill,
Congress directed EPA to contract
with the National Research Council of
the National Academy of Sciences, to
review the quality of the science used
to develop Total Maximum Daily
Loads (TMDLs). TMDLs establish the
analytical basis for watershed-based
decisions on pollution reductions
necessary to meet water quality
standards.
EPA GOAL/
OBJECTIVE
Goal 2
Objective 2
FINDINGS OF THE EVALUATION
There is enough science to move forward
with decision-making and implementation
of the TMDL Program. Program changes
should be made to better account for
uncertainties, to improve the water quality
standards and monitoring programs, and
to employ adaptive implementation. The
report also recommends that states
strengthen their water quality monitoring
programs.
AUTHOR AND
LOCATION OF
THE REPORT
National Research
Council of the
National Academy
of Sciences
Located at http://
www.nap.edu/books
Search: 0309075793
EPA Should Strengthen Its Efforts
to Measure and Encourage
Pollution Prevention
The audit reviewed not only the extent
to which companies are employing
pollution prevention strategies
but also the major incentives
and disincentives that affect the
employment of those strategies.
Goal 4
Objective 5
The evaluation found limitations with the
available Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data
when trying to determine the extent to which
companies were adopting pollution preven-
tion strategies. It also found that the public
availability of the TRI data and the opportu-
nity for financial return are the major
incentives for businesses to employ pollution
prevention strategies, whereas technical
challenges and costs are disincentives.
GAO
GAO-01-283
February 21, 2001
Located at http://
www.gao.gov
Hazardous Waste: Effect of
Proposed Rule's Extra Cleanup
Requirements Is Uncertain
EPA proposed several amendments
to the 1993 Corrective Action
Management Unit (CAMU) rule.
GAO described the major differences
between the 1993 rule and the most
recently proposed CAMU rule,
determined what data are available to
demonstrate that CAMUs approved
under the 1993 rule remain protective
of human health and the environ-
ment, and determined stakeholders'
views on the possible deterrent
effects that the proposed CAMU
rule could have on corrective action.
GoalS
Objective 1
EPA intended the 1993 CAMU rule to provide
regulatory relief from three RCRA requirements
that were disincentives to some hazardous
waste cleanups. The Agency also expected the
rule to provide parties with the flexibility to
design CAMUs according to site-specific
circumstances rather than "one size fits all"
requirements. EPA expected the rule to lead to
faster and more efficient, but equally safe,
cleanups under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action and
Superfund programs. However, the legal
challenge to the 1993 rule discouraged some
parties from requesting CAMUs or using the
full flexibility afforded by the rule, and con-
sequently relatively few CAMUs were requested.
The proposed rule is intended to resolve the
legal uncertainty over the 1993 rule; however, it
would add requirements and processes. Certain
groups believe these requirements are necessary
to ensure the future safety of CAMUs. Other
groups believe the changes would necessarily re-
duce the flexibility intended by the 1993 rule,
which would increase the time and cost of some
cleanups and could discourage requests for
some CAMUs after the proposed rule is issued.
GAO
GAO-01-57
October 20, 2000
Located at http://
www.gao.gov
A-2
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
TITLE/SCOPE
Brownfields: Information on the
Programs of EPA and Selected
States
In reviewing EPA and five states,
GAO provided information about
how the assistance provided under
EPAs programs compares with the
assistance provided by selected states
with respect to overall strategy, the
forms of assistance, eligibility, and
other factors; the amounts of
assistance provided by EPA and
these states; and the results reported
by EPA and these states.
EPA GOAL/
OBJECTIVE
GoalS
Objective 1
FINDINGS OF THE EVALUATION
GAO found that EPA and the states have
difficulty in determining whether their
programs are achieving their overall goals.
Although EPA maintains a database to track
the progress of its program, the data it
collects are limited because recipients of
EPAs assistance are not required to report
on the status of their cleanup projects. The
states also have limited information,
primarily because they do not track the
economic benefits of the assistance they
provide or they use forecasted results, rather
than actual results, to measure progress.
AUTHOR AND
LOCATION OF
THE REPORT
GAO
GAO-01-52
December 15, 2000
Located at http://
www.gao.gov
Hazardous Waste: EPA's National
and Regional Ombudsmen Do
Not Have Sufficient Independence
GAO compared the national
hazardous waste ombudsman's
operations with professional
standards for independence and other
factors and determined the relative
roles and responsibilities of EPAs
national and regional ombudsmen.
GoalS
Objective 1
GAO found that key aspects of the
operations of EPAs national hazardous
waste ombudsman differ from professional
standards for ombudsmen who deal with
inquiries from the public. For example, the
position of the national ombudsman is in
the organization unit whose decisions the
ombudsman is responsible for investigating.
The regional ombudsmen are less
independent than the national ombudsman
and play a more reduced role. Communica-
tion between the national and regional
ombudsmen is limited.
GAO
GAO-1-813
July 27, 2001
Located at http://
www.gao.gov
Ensure the Safety of Underground
Storage Tanks (USTs)
GAO was asked to determine
whether the USTs regulated by EPA
and the states have the required
equipment and are being properly
operated and maintained. GAO also
looked at the breadth of EPAs and
the states' tank inspections, the types
of enforcement actions taken, and
whether upgraded tanks were still
leaking. Surveys were sent to tank
program managers in all 50 states and
the District of Columbia, and GAO
spoke with officials in all 9 EPA
regions that are responsible for
monitoring tanks on tribal lands.
GoalS
Objective 2
GAO estimates that about 89% (616,685) of
the total number of regulated tanks had
received federally required equipment up-
grades by the end of FY 2000. GAO also
estimates that about 29% (201,001) of the
regulated tanks are not being operated or
maintained properly, increasing the risk of soil
and groundwater contamination. Most states
and EPA do not physically inspect USTs
frequently enough or have access to the most
effective enforcement tools to ensure compli-
ance with federal requirements. The states
and EPA cannot ensure that all active USTs
have the required leak-, spill-, and overfill-
protection equipment installed, nor can they
guarantee that the installed equipment is
being properly operated and maintained.
EPA has the opportunity to correct these
limitations and to help states correct them
through its new tank program initiatives.
GAO
GAO-01-464
May 4, 2001
Located at http://
www.gao.gov
www. epa.gov/ocfo
A-3
-------
TITLE/SCOPE
State of the Great Lakes 2001
Scientific experts used 33 of a
proposed 80 indicators to assess the
health of the lakes and identify
management implications.
EPA GOAL/
OBJECTIVE
Goal 6
Objective 1
FINDINGS OF THE EVALUATION
Conditions in the Great Lakes range from
"good" for the quality of drinking water to
"poor" for the impacts of invasive species.
About 25% of the indicators showed good
or improving conditions, 25% showed poor
or deteriorating conditions, and the rest
demonstrated mixed results.
AUTHOR AND
LOCATION OF
THE REPORT
EPA's Great Lakes
National Program
Office and Environ-
ment Canada, with
input from more
than 50 governmental
and nongovern-
mental entities.
EPA-905-R-01-003
Located athttp://
www.binational.net/
sog!2001/index.html
Great Lakes Ecosystem Report
2000
The Great Lakes Ecosystem Report
2000 reported to Congress on
progress in reducing and virtually
eliminating toxic chemicals, managing
contaminated sediments, protecting
and restoring habitat and natural
areas, monitoring the health of the
Great Lakes, and protecting human
health, noting that great challenges
remain in each area.
Goal 6
Objective 1
Noteworthy progress on mercury reduction
has been made under existing agreements
with the American Hospital Association,
three Northwest Indiana steel mills, and the
Chlorine Institute. Recent sediment
remediation under a variety of authorities
has resulted in the removal of large amounts
of contaminated sediments. Recent biological
monitoring reveals a Great Lakes ecosystem
in flux. Significant changes to the food web
have occurred, likely as a result of invasive
species.
EPAs Great
Lakes National
Program Office
EPA-905-R-01-001
Located at http://
www.epa.gov/
glnpo/rptcong/2001/
index.html
Review of the Research Program
of the Partnership for a New
Generation of Vehicles (PNGV):
Seventh Report (2001)
The scope of the project is to
critically assess research progress
and commented on a number of
issues related to the efficacy of the
program to meet its goals within the
PNGV time frame. In particular, the
scope of the project is to comment
on the overall balance and adequacy
of the PNGV research effort,
examine emission control research
efforts, and conduct an international
bench-marking evaluation of
selected PNGV related technologies.
Goal 6
Objective 2
The review panel stated that "the need to
reduce the fuel consumption and carbon
dioxide emissions of the US automotive
fleet is more urgent than ever." In particular,
the panel cited the change in consumer
preferences away from traditional cars to
sport utility vehicles.
Standing
Committee to
Review the Research
Program of the
Partnership for a
New Generation of
Vehicles, Board on
Energy and Environ-
mental Systems,
Transportation
Research Board of
of the National
Research Council
Located at http://
www.nap.edu/
catalog/
10180.html?onpi_
topnews081301
A-4
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
TITLE/SCOPE
Economic Indicators of Market
Transformation: Energy Efficient
Lighting and EPA's Green Lights
The scope of the study was to
derive the market transformation
effect of EPA's Green Lights
program in the market for
energy-efficient lighting products
EPA GOAL/
OBJECTIVE
Goal 6
Objective 2
FINDINGS OF THE EVALUATION
The study concludes that market trans from-
ation programs—and Green Lights in
particular—were highly effective in trans-
forming the market for electronic ballasts.
AUTHOR AND
LOCATION OF
THE REPORT
Marvin J. Horowitz,
Adjunct Professor,
Johns Hopkins
University, and
president, Demand
Research
Published in the fall
edition of The
Energy journal
22(4): 95-122.
Freedom of Information Act Task
Force Report
On April 27, 2001, EPAs
Administrator established a Task
Force to undertake a 90-day review
of EPAs implementation of the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
Goal?
Objective 1
The Task Force made 18 recommendations
in three areas: accountability, centralization,
and updating/am en ding current policies,
regulations, and guidance. During the
review, the Task Force discovered that FOIA
processing is often given low priority. The
report cited that when backlogs develop or
litigation ensues because of errors in
processing, no one can be held accountable.
The Task Force found that problems in
in communication and consistency are linked
to EPAs highly decentralized operation.
EPA FOIA Task
Force
Located at http://
www.epa.gov/foia/
images
Search: Finaltask
force.pdf
Design for Objective 8.4 Could Be
Improved by Reorienting Focus
on Outcomes
The purpose of this pilot program
evaluation was to determine whether
program evaluation techniques are
appropriate for measuring progress
in accomplishing GPRA goals and to
document and evaluate the program
designs for Goal 8 and Objective 8.4.
GoalS
Objective 4
The program evaluation approach provided a
better understanding of the programs,
answered key questions, and provided a
partnership approach between the Office of
the Inspector General and the Office of
Research and Development that was beneficial
in developing meaningful observations about
the designs for Goal 8 and Objective 8.4.
EPAs Office of
the Inspector
General
November 2001
Report No. 2002-
P-00002
Project XL: Directory of
Regulatory, Policy, and
Technology Innovations
This report evaluates more than 70
innovations being tested by Project
XL (excellence and Leadership).
GoalS
Objective 6
The report assesses the expected advantage of
the Project XL innovations over the current
approach, the results to date, the efficacy of
the innovation, and its suitability for
application beyond the pilot scale.
EPAs Office of
Policy, Economics,
and Innovation
November 2000
Located at http://
www.epa.gov/
projectxl
Search:
EPA 100-R-00-023A
www. epa.gov/ocfo
A-5
-------
TITLE/SCOPE
Stakeholder Involvement & Public
Participation at the U.S. EPA:
Lessons Learned, Barriers, &
Innovative Approaches
This is the first-ever assessment of
Agency-wide lessons learned on
stakeholder involvement, supporting
the development of EPA's Public
Involvement Policy.
EPA GOAL/
OBJECTIVE
GoalS
Objective 6
FINDINGS OF THE EVALUATION
The report reviews EPAs efforts to involve
the public through a meta-analysis of formal
evaluations and informal summaries from
across the Agency. The meta-analysis identifies
key cross-cutting lessons learned, pinpoints
unique barriers and ways to overcome them,
and highlights innovative approaches to
stakeholder involvement and public
participation.
AUTHOR AND
LOCATION OF
THE REPORT
EPAs Office of
Policy, Economics
and Innovation
EPA-100-R-00-040
January 2001
Located at http://
www.epa.gov/
s takeholders /pdf/
sipp.pdf
Living the Vision
This document reports on the
progress of the Metal Finishing
Strategic Goals Program.
GoalS
Objective 7
The document describes the industry
Performance Partnership Program and shows
the degree to which the industry met a series
of voluntary "better than compliance" facility
performance targets.
EPAs Office of
Policy, Economics
and Innovation
EPA 240-R-00-007
January 2001
Located at http://
www. strategicgoals.org
EPA's Science Advisory Board
Panels: Improved Policies and
Procedures Needed to Ensure
Independence and Balance
The purpose of this evaluation was
to determine whether the Board's
policies and procedures are adequate
to ensure panel independence and
balance and to provide sufficient
information to the public.
GoalS
Objective 9
Science Advisory Board (SAB) staff policies
and procedures do not ensure, in all cases,
that SAB peer review panelists are indepen-
dent and that the panels are properly balanced.
Staff policies and procedures do not ensure
in all cases that the public is sufficiently
informed about points of view represented
on the panels. The staff needs to better
maintain records and train staff.
The SAB is implementing the following
recommended improvements: institute a
more formal method of determining and
documenting conflict of interest situations,
more aggressively open the panel formation
to the public so they can provide input,
implement more thorough documentation
of the process and rationale by which
panelists are finally selected, further develop
the "disclosure process," improve record-
keeping procedures, and provide more
systematic training for SAB panelists and
staff.
GAO
GAO-01-536
June 12, 2001
Located at
http: / / www.gao.gov
A-6
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
TITLE/SCOPE
Program Element Review: FIFRA
Worker Protection Standard (WPS)
EPA, with state assistance, reviewed
EPA and state implementation of the
enforcement and compliance compo-
nents of the Federal Insecticide, Fun-
gicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
Worker Protection Standard (WPS).
EPA GOAL/
OBJECTIVE
Goal 9
Objective 1
FINDINGS OF THE EVALUATION
The goal of the WPS Program Element
Review is to assess the effectiveness of EPA
(OECA and regional offices) and state efforts
to ensure compliance with WPS provisions
that protect workers who handle, prepare, and
apply pesticides in the field or who work in
fields where pesticides are applied. The pre-
liminary results of the WPS Program
Element Review indicate that specific
improvements in implementation of the WPS
program at all levels (EPA and state) would
make for a more effective program. Important
among these findings, OECA found that
improvements in EPAs management of the
program are called for, including improved
planning and communication, issuance of
additional guidance, enhanced efforts to
ensure results associated with EPA/state
cooperative agreements, and improved
training. EPA also found that state WPS
enforcement and compliance implementation
could be enhanced. In particular, the Agency
found that some states have not yet taken up
enforcement of this program and that certain
states' WPS inspections could be enhanced
and made more effective. EPA also found
that additional efforts need to be made to
facilitate better communication of farm-
workers' complaints to the regulating agencies.
AUTHOR AND
LOCATION OF
THE REPORT
EPAs Office of
Enforcement and
Compliance
Assurance, Office
of Compliance,
Enforcement
Planning, Targeting
and Data Division
Report will be
available early in
CY 2002 from
palmer.daniel@
epa.gov.
Validation Study: To Measure the
Effectiveness of the Agency's
Corrective Actions to Strengthen
Grants Management
This study addresses the FY 2001
Agency-level weakness "Improved
Management of Assistance
Agreements."
Goal 10
Objective 2
The validation study shows that EPA
headquarters and regional offices are making
progress in improving grants management
and that they are generally implementing the
Agency's post-award policies. The study does
indicate a few problem areas that EPA is
continuing to address, and the authors
believe that the Agency-level weakness can
be eliminated in FY 2002.
EPAs Office of
Administration
and Resources
Management, Office
of Grants
Debarment, Grants
Adminis tration
Division
Contact Martha
Monell, Director,
Grants Administra-
tion Division at
(202) 564-5387.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
A-7
-------
TITLE/SCOPE
Human Capital: Implementing an
Effective Workforce Strategy
Would Help EPA to Achieve Its
Strategic Goals
The GAO reviewed the extent that
EPA's strategy includes the key
elements associated with successful
human capital strategies, the major
challenges EPA faces in the successful
implementation of its strategy, and
the extent to which EPAs deployment
of its enforcement workforce ensures
that federal environmental require-
ments are consistently enforced
across regions.
EPA GOAL/
OBJECTIVE
Goal 10
Objective 2
FINDINGS OF THE EVALUATION
The report found that EPAs human capital
strategy is a promising first step towards
improving the Agency's management of its
workforce, but it lacks some of the key
elements that are commonly found in the
human capital strategies of high performing
organizations. EPAs major challenges in
human capital management involve assessing
the work requirements for its employees,
ensuring continuity of leadership in the
Agency, and hiring and developing skilled
staff. EPA does not systematically deploy its
enforcement workforce to ensure the consis-
tent enforcement of federal regulations
throughout all EPA regions and bases
deployment decisions on outdated and
incomplete information on key regional
workload factors.
AUTHOR AND
LOCATION OF
THE REPORT
GAO
GAO-01-812
July 31, 2001
Located at http://
www.gao .gov
Using GPRA to Manage for
Environmental Results—Linking
Agency Mission and Systems to
Maximize Environmental Results
This report evaluated EPAs progress,
challenges, and opportunities in the
near and short term improvements in
implementing GPRA. The report
covered Goals, Priorities, Strategies
Measurement, Human Capital, and
Accountability as interlocking,
mutually dependent components.
Goal 10
Objective 2
This evaluation suggested that to improve
GPRA implementation and efficiency, EPA
must strengthen its partnerships with states
and other agencies. Also, EPA needs to place
greater focus on the ultimate results and
outcomes of its activities rather than actions
performed, and should more carefully
consider science and cost when setting
priorities. Additionally, EPA needs to invest
in management, scientific, and technical
competencies of its staff, as well as develop
and integrate quality outcomes-oriented
performance and cost information into
budgeting, decision making and accountability
systems.
EPAs Office of
the Inspector
General
Report No. 2001-
B-00001
June 2001
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
j rj
Data Quality for Assessments of
FY 2001 Performance
-------
APPENDIX B:
DATA QUALITY FOR ASSESSMENTS OF FY 2001 PERFORMANCE
Goal 1 -Clean Air
Appendix B describes the quality of the data used to measure EPA's performance. For each of the 10 EPA Strategic
Goals, this appendix describes (1) the performance measures (PMs), (2) the database(s) supporting the PMs, (3) the
source of the database(s), (4) the quality of the data, (5) planned improvements to the data or database(s), and (6) any
material inadequacies.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart pages II-7, II-8, II-9)
• Total number of people who live in areas designated to attainment of the clean air standard for ozone.
(APG 1)
• Areas designated to attainment for the ozone, PM-10, CO, SO2, NO2, and Pb standards. (APG 1,2, & 5)
• Additional people living in newly designated areas with demonstrated attainment of the ozone, PM, CO, SO2,
NO2, and Pb standards. (APG 1,2, & 5)
• Total number of people who live in areas designated in attainment with clean air standards for PM, CO, SO2,
NO2, and Pb. (APG 2 & 5)
• Total number of people living in areas with demonstrated attainment of the NO2 standard. (APG 5)
• CO reduced from Mobile Sources. (APG 5)
[Note: PM = particulate matter, PM-10 = particulate matter 10 micrometers or less in diameter, CO = carbon
monoxide, SO2 = sulfur dioxide, NO2 = nitrogen dioxide, Pb = lead.]
Performance Database: Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS). AIRS comprises two major subsystems:
(1) the Air Quality Subsystem (AQS) stores ambient air quality data (used to determine whether nonattainment areas
have the 3 years of clean air data needed for redesignation), and (2) the AIRS Facility Subsystem (AFS) stores
emissions and compliance/enforcement information for facilities. AIRS is accessible at the web site http://
wwwepa.gov/ttn/airs/.
Findings and Required Elements Data System (FREDS). FREDS is used to track the progress of states and regions
in reviewing and approving the required data elements of the State Implementation Plans (SIPs). SIPs define what
actions a state will take to improve the air quality in areas that do not meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
FREDS is an internal database.
Data from AIRS and FREDS are both complete and final for FY 2001.
Data Source: AIRS - State and local agency data from State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS).
FREDS - Data are provided by EPA's regional offices.
Data Quality: AIRS - The quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) of the national air monitoring program
have several major components: the Data Quality Objective (DQO) process, reference and equivalent methods
program, EPA's National Performance Audit Program (NPAP), system audits, and network reviews. To ensure
quality data, the SLAMS are required to meet the following: (1) each site must meet network design and siting criteria;
(2) each site must provide adequate quality assurance assessment, control, and corrective action functions according to
minimum program requirements; (3) all sampling methods and equipment must meet EPA reference or equivalent
requirements; (4) acceptable data validation and record-keeping procedures must be followed; and (5) data from
SLAMS must be summarized and reported annually to EPA. Finally, there are system audits that regularly review the
overall air quality data collection activity for any needed changes or corrections.
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-l
-------
Goal 1 - Clean Air (continued)
FREDS - There are no formal quality assurance and control procedures.
There are no specific AIRS data limitations. Potential data issues could include: (1) incomplete or missing data (e.g.,
some values might be absent because of incomplete reporting, and some values subsequently might be changed
because of quality assurance activities); (2) inaccuracies due to imprecise measurement and recording (e.g., monitors
are faulty, air pollution levels measured in the vicinity of a particular monitoring site might not be representative of
the prevailing air quality of a county or urban area); and (3) inconsistent or nonstandard methods of data collection
and processing (e.g., noncalibrated and nonoperational monitors). However, all data issues are subject to the QA/QC
procedures listed above and therefore are resolved or accounted for depending on how the data will be used.
There are no specific FREDS data limitations. A potential data issue could include incomplete or missing data from
regions. However, all data are reviewed for completeness.
Improvements: AIRS - EPA is nearing completion of the reengineering of the AQS to make it a more user-
friendly, Windows-based system. As a result, the ambient air quality data stored in AQS will be more easily accessible
through the Internet. AFS, a mainframe system that the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) used
for many years for managing its national emission database, has been replaced by the National Emissions Trends
(NET) database. NET is an ORACLE database accessible through the Internet. Both systems will be enhanced to
include the data standards (e.g., latitude/longitude, chemical nomenclature) developed under the Agency's Reinventing
Environmental Information (REI) Initiative. Facility identification standards will be included so that air emission data
in the NET database can be linked with environmental data in other Agency databases for the same facility.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart pages II-7, II-8)
• Reduction in mobile source PM 10. (APG 2)
• Reduction in mobile source PM 2.5. (APG 2)
• Reduction in mobile source volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions. (APG 1)
• Reduction in mobile source NOX emissions. (APG 1)
Performance Database: Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS). AIRS comprises two major subsystems:
(1) the Air Quality Subsystem (AQS) stores ambient air quality data (used to determine whether nonattainment areas
have the 3 years of clean air data needed for redesignation), and (2) the AIRS Facility Subsystem (AFS) stores
emissions and compliance/enforcement information for facilities. AIRS is accessible at the web site http://
www.epa.gov/ttn/airs/. Data from AIRS are complete and final for FY 2001.
Data Source: AIRS - State and local agency data from SLAMS.
Data Quality: AIRS - The quality assurance and quality control of the national air monitoring program have several
major components: the DQO process, reference and equivalent methods program, EPAs NPAP, system audits, and
network reviews. To ensure quality data, the SLAMS are required to meet the following: (1) each site must meet
network design and siting criteria; (2) each site must provide adequate quality assurance assessment, control, and
corrective action functions according to minimum program requirements; (3) all sampling methods and equipment
must meet EPA reference or equivalent requirements; (4) acceptable data validation and record-keepingprocedures
must be followed; and (5) data from SLAMS must be summarized and reported annually to EPA. Finally, system
audits regularly review the overall air quality data collection activity for any needed changes or corrections.
There are no specific AIRS data limitations. Potential data issues could include (1) incomplete or missing data (e.g.,
some values might be absent because of incomplete reporting, and some values subsequently might be changed
because of quality assurance activities); (2) inaccuracies due to imprecise measurement and recording (e.g., monitors
are faulty; air pollution levels measured in the vicinity of a particular monitoring site might not be representative of
B-2 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 1 - Clean Air (continued)
the prevailing air quality of a county or urban area); and (3) inconsistent or nonstandard methods of data collection
and processing (e.g., noncalibrated and nonoperational monitors). However, all data issues are subject to the QA/QC
procedures listed above and therefore are resolved or accounted for depending on how the data will be used.
EPA does make estimates of mobile source emissions for both past and future years. The most complete and
systematic process for making and recording such estimates is the "Trends" inventory process executed each year
within EPA by OAQPS's Emissions, Monitoring, and Analysis Division (EMD). The Assessment and Modeling
Division is the coordinator within the Office of Transportation and Air Quality for providing EMD information
and methods for making the mobile source estimates. In addition, EMD's contractors obtain some necessary
information directly from other sources; for example, weather data and the Federal Highway Administration's
(FHWA) Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) estimates by state. EMD always creates and publishes the emission inventory
estimate for the most recent historical year, detailed down to the county level and with 31 line items representing
mobile sources. Usually, EMD also creates estimates of emissions for future years. When the method for estimating
emissions changes significantly, EMD usually revises its older estimates of emissions in years prior to the most recent
year to avoid a sudden discontinuity in the apparent emissions trend. EMD publishes the national emission estimates
in hard copy; county-level estimates are available electronically.
It is useful to understand just what mobile source information is updated in Trends each year. An input is updated
annually only if there is a convenient source of annual data for the input. Generally, VMT, the mix of VMT by type
of vehicles (FHWA types, not EPA types), temperatures, gasoline properties, and the designs of inspection/
maintenance (I/M) programs are updated each year. The age mix of highway vehicles is updated, using state
registration data; this captures the effect of fleet turnover, assuming emission factors for older and newer vehicles are
correct. Emission factors for all mobile sources and activity estimates for non-road sources are changed only when
the Office of Transportation and Air Quality requests that this be done and is able to provide the new information in
a timely manner.
The limitations of the inventory estimates for mobile sources come from limitations in the modeled emission factors
in grams per mile and also the estimated vehicle miles traveled for each vehicle class. For non-road emissions, the
estimates come from a model using equipment populations, emission factors per hour or unit of work, and an
estimate of usage. These input data are frequently revised with newer data. Any limitations in the input data, such as
emission factors (based on emission factor testing and models predicting overall fleet emission factors, such as in
grams per mile), vehicle miles traveled (which are derived from Department of Transportation data), and other
factors, will carry over into limitations in the emission inventory estimates.
Improvements: AIRS - EPA is nearing completion of the reengineering of the AQS to make it a more user-
friendly, Windows-based system. As a result, the ambient air quality data stored in AQS will be more easily accessible
through the Internet. AFS, a mainframe system that the OAQPS used for many years for managing its national
emission database, has been replaced by the NET database. NET is an ORACLE database accessible through the
Internet. Both systems will be enhanced to include the data standards (e.g., latitude/longitude, chemical nomenclature)
developed under the Agency's REI Initiative. Facility identification standards will be included so that air emission data
in the NET database can be linked with environmental data in other Agency databases for the same facility.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page II-9)
Combined stationary and mobile source reduction in air toxics emissions. (APG 4)
Performance Database: National Toxic Inventory (NTI). Information about the NTI and the National-Scale Air
Toxics Assessment (NATA) is located at the web site http://wwwepa.gov/ttn/atw/nata. There are performance
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-3
-------
Goal 1 - Clean Air (continued)
data lags for this performance measure because EPA relies on updates to the NTI, which are realistically feasible only
every 3 years. In addition, typically data are not available until about 2 years after the inventory date. In other words,
EPA reports data for this performance measure as follows:
NTI Year
Performance
Target Year
Data Available
1999
1999
2002
2002
2000
2004
2002
2001
2004
2002
2002
2004
2005
2003
2007
Data Source: The NTI includes emissions from large industrial or point sources, smaller stationary area sources, and
mobile sources. The baseline NTI (for base years 1990—1993) includes emissions information for 188 hazardous air
pollutants from more than 900 stationary sources. It is based on data collected during the development of Maximum
Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards, state and local data, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data, and
emissions estimates using accepted emission inventory methodologies. The 1996 and the 1999 NTI contain facility-
specific, nonpoint source, and mobile source estimates and are used as input to National Air Toxics Assessment
(NATA) modeling. (A dispersion model, Assessment System for Pollution Exposure Nationwide [ASPEN]
contributes to NATA modeling.) The primary source of data in the 1996 NTI is state and local data. The 1996 and
1999 state and local facility data are supplemented with data collected during the development of the MACT
standards and TRI data.
Data Quality: Because the NTI is primarily a database designed to house information from other primary sources,
most of the quality assurance and control efforts have been to identify duplicate data from the different data sources
and to supplement missing data. When a discrepancy between data sources is found, EPA tries to determine the best
primary source data. Mobile source data are validated by using speciated test data from the mobile source emission
factor program, along with peer-reviewed models that estimate national tons for the relevant year.
Each base year EPA staff, state and local agencies, and industry have reviewed NTI. To assist in the review of the
1999 NTI, EPA provided a comparison of data from the three sources (MACT, TRI, and state and local inventories)
for each facility.
The NTI contains data from other primary references. 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. Because of the lesser level of detail in the 1993 NTI, it is not suitable for
input to dispersion models.
Improvements: The 1996 and 1999 NTI are a significant improvement over the baseline NTI because of the added
facility-level detail (e.g., stack heights, latitude/longitude locations), making it useful for dispersion model input. Future
inventories (2002, etc.) are expected to improve significantly because of increased interest in the NTI by regulatory
agencies, environmental interests, and industry, and the greater potential for modeling and trend analysis.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-10)
• SO2 emissions. (APG 6)
• Nox reduction. (APG 7)
Performance Database: The following are the databases used to support the performance measures in the Acid
Rain Program: Emissions Tracking System (ETS), SO2 and NOXemissions collected by Continuous Emission
Monitoring Systems (GEMS), CASTNet for dry deposition, and National Atmospheric Deposition Program
B-4 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 1 - Clean Air (continued)
(NADP) for wet deposition. Data are collected on a calendar year basis. Results for FY 2001 will be available
approximately 6 months into 2002.
Data Source: On a quarterly basis ETS receives hourly measurements of SO2, NOx, volumetric flow, CO2, and
other emission-related parameters from more than 2,000 units affected by Title IV
CASTNet measures particle and gas acidic deposition chemistry. Specifically, CASTNet measures sulfate and nitrate
dry deposition and meteorological information at approximately 70 active monitoring sites. CASTNet is primarily an
eastern, long-term dry deposition network funded, operated, and maintained by EPAs Office of Air and Radiation
(OAR).
NADP is a national long-term wet deposition network that measures precipitation chemistry and provides long-term
geographic and temporal trends in concentration and deposition of major cations and anions. Specifically NADP
provides measurements of sulfate and nitrate wet deposition at approximately 200 active monitoring sites. EPA,
along with several other federal agencies, states, and other private organizations, provides funding and support for
NADP. The Illinois State Water Survey, University of Illinois maintains the NADP database.
Data Quality: Quality assurance and control requirements dictate performing a series of quality assurance tests of
GEMS' 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 GEMS fails the bias test, indicating a potential for
systematic underestimation of emissions, either the problem must be identified and corrected or the data are adjusted
to minimize the bias.
CASTNet has established data quality objectives and quality control procedures for accuracy and precision.
CASTNet recently underwent formal Agency peer review by an external panel.
NADP has established data quality objectives and quality control procedures for accuracy, precision, and
representativeness. The intended use of these data is to establish spatial and temporal trends in wet deposition and
precipitation chemistry. The NADP methods of determining wet deposition values have undergone extensive peer
review, handled entirely by the NADP housed at the Illinois State Water Survey, University of Illinois. Assessments of
changes in NADP methods are developed primarily through the academic community and reviewed through the
technical literature process.
The ETS provides instant feedback to the data sources (e.g., the electrical utilities) to identify any data reporting
problems. EPA staff then conduct data quality review on each quarterly ETS file. In addition, states or EPA staff
conduct random audits on selected sources' data submission.
There are no known data limitations with any of these data sources.
Improvements: To improve the spatial resolution of the Network (CASTNet), additional monitoring sites are
needed. However, at this time EPA has no plans to add sites.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page II-8)
Complete PM longitudinal panel study data collection and report exposure data. (APG 3)
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-5
-------
Goal 1 - Clean Air (continued)
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page II-8)
Final PM Air Quality Criteria Document complete. (APG 3)
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page II-8)
Report on health effects of concentrated ambient PM in healthy animals and humans, in asthmatic and elderly
humans, and in animal models of asthma and respiratory infections. (APG 3)
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
Goal 2 - Clean and Safe Water
Appendix B describes the quality of the data used to measure EPAs performance. For each of the 10 EPA Strategic
Goals, this appendix describes (1) the performance measures (PMs), (2) the database(s) supporting the PMs, (3) the
source of the database(s), (4) the quality of the data, (5) planned improvements to the data or database(s), and (6) any
material inadequacies.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-17)
Population served by community water systems with no violations during the year of any federally enforceable
health-based standards that were in place by 1994. (APG 8)
Performance Database: Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS or SDWIS-FED). FY 2001 annual
performance data are not yet available. Using third-quarter SDWIS data, EPA is projected to meet the FY 2001
target. http://www.epa.gov/safewater/databases.htmWfed
Data Source: States, regions for Direct Implementation (DI) states.
Data Quality: SDWIS has numerous edit checks built into the software to reject erroneous data. There are quality
assurance manuals for states and regions to follow to ensure data quality. EPA offers training to states on data entry
and data retrieval, and it also provides a troubleshooter's guide and an error code database for states to use when
they have questions on how to enter or correct data.
Quality assurance (QA) audits of the Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water's quality assurance/quality control
(QA/QC) processes, including those for SDWIS, are carried out every 3 years. The QA Division coordinates this
effort. EPA last completed a quality assurance audit in July 1999 and will complete a QA audit for 1999-2001 data in
FY 2002. SDWIS was identified as an Agency weakness in the FY 1999 and FY 2000 Federal Managers' Financial
Integrity Act Reports. The Data Reliability Action Plan (DRAP), described below, developed and implemented to
address corrective actions for SDWIS identified in 1999, was completed by the end of FY 2001. However, EPA,
states, and stakeholders have expanded on this plan by developing an Information Strategy. This strategy, which
could be considered Phase II of the Data Reliability Action Plan, sets the direction for a comprehensive
modernization of SDWIS over the next 3 to 5 years.
Currently SDWIS is an "exceptions" database that focuses exclusively on public water systems' noncompliance with
drinking water regulations (health-based and program). States implement drinking water regulations with the support
of the Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) grant program. States with primacy determine whether public water
B-6 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 2 - Clean and Safe Water (continued)
systems have violated maximum contaminant levels (MCL), treatment technique requirements, consumer notification
requirements, or monitoring and reporting requirements, and they report those violations through SDWIS.
Recent state data verification and other QA analyses indicate that the most significant data quality problem is under
reporting to EPA of both monitoring and reporting violations and incomplete inventory characteristics. Monitoring
and reporting violations are not included in the health-based violation category; however, failures to monitor could
mask treatment technique and MCL violations. The incomplete inventory data limit EPAs ability to: (1) accurately
quantify the number of sources and treatments applied, (2) undertake geospatial analysis, and (3) integrate and share
data with other data systems.
Improvements: Using a newly developed information strategy developed by EPA in partnership with the states and
major stakeholders, several improvements to SDWIS are underway.
First, EPA will continue to work with states to implement the DRAP, a multistep approach to improve the quality
and reliability of data in SDWIS. The DRAP already has improved the completeness, accuracy, and timeliness of the
data in SDWIS through: (1) training courses for SDWIS data entry, error correction, and regulation-specific
compliance determination and reporting requirements; (2) specific DRAP analyses, follow-up activities, and state-
specific technical assistance; and (3) web-enabling SDWIS-STATE for easier data entry by the states.
Second, more states will use SDWIS-STATE, a software information system jointly designed by states and EPA, for
support as they implement the drinking water program. SDWIS-STATE is the counterpart to EPAs federal drinking
water information system, SDWIS-FED, and employs the same edit criteria and enforces the same mandatory data
elements. If the SDWIS-STATE system is fully used by a state, the information it holds meets EPAs minimum data
requirements and can easily be reported to EPA, thereby eliminating data conversion errors and improving data
quality and accuracy. In addition, a web-enabled version of SDWIS-STATE and a data migration application that all
states can use to process data for upload to SDWIS-FED are being developed. EPA estimates that by the end of
2003,40 states will be using SDWIS-STATE for data collection.
Third, EPA is modifying SDWIS-FED to: (1) streamline its table structure, which simplifies updates and retrievals;
(2) minimize data entry options that result in complex software and prevent meaningful edit criteria; and (3) enforce
compliance with permitted values and Agency data standards through software edits, all of which will improve the
accuracy of the data.
Finally, EPA, in partnership with the states, is developing information modules on other drinking water programs,
such as source water protection, underground injection control, and the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. These
modules will be integrated with SDWIS to provide a more comprehensive data set with which to characterize the
quality of the Nation's drinkingwater supplies.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-17)
Cumulative number of beaches for which monitoring and closure data is available at http://wwwepa.gov/OST/
beaches/. (APG 9)
Performance Database: National Health Protection Survey of Beaches Information Management System.
FY 2001 annual performance data are complete. http://www.epa.gov/OST/beaches/.
Data Source: State and local governments voluntarily provide the information. The database includes fields
identifying the beaches for which monitoring and notification information is available. The database also identifies
those states that have received a Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health (BEACH) Act grant. This
information is updated annually.
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-7
-------
Goal 2 - Clean and Safe Water (continued)
Data Quality: A standard survey form, approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), is distributed
by mail in hard copy and is available on the Internet for electronic submission. Where data are entered over the
Internet, a password is issued to ensure the appropriate party is completing the survey. States receiving a BEACH Act
grant are subject to the Agency's grant regulations at 40 CFR 31.45, which require states and tribes to develop and
implement QA practices for the collection of environmental information; these procedures will help ensure data
quality. EPA reviews the survey responses to ensure the information is complete and then follows up with the state
or local government to obtain additional information where needed. However, the Agency cannot verify the
accuracy of the voluntary information state and local governments provide.
Participation in this survey and collection of data is voluntary. Although the voluntary response rate has been high, the
survey has not captured the complete universe of beaches. Participation in the survey will become a mandatory
condition of grants awarded under the BEACH Act Program (described below); however, state and local
governments are not required to apply for a grant. Currently the Agency has data standards, but procedures,
methods, indicators, and thresholds can vary between jurisdictions because to date this has been a voluntary program.
The Agency expects the limitations to diminish as more states apply for BEACH Act grants.
Improvements: With the passage of the BEACH Act of 2000, the Agency became authorized to award grants to
states to develop and implement monitoring and notification programs consistent with federal requirements. As the
Agency awards these grants, it will require standard program procedures, sampling and assessment methods, and
data elements for reporting. To the extent that state governments apply for and receive these grants, the amount,
quality, and consistency of available data will improve. In addition, the BEACH Act requires the Agency to maintain a
database of national coastal recreation water pollution occurrences. The Agency will fulfill this requirement by
revising the current database to include this new information. In revising the database, the Agency will investigate
modes for electronic exchange of information and ways to reduce the number of reporting requirements.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-18)
States submissions of new or revised water quality standards that EPA has reviewed and approved or disapproved,
and promulgated Federal replacement standards. (APG 11)
Performance Database: No formal database exists to track EPA approval/disapproval actions on new and revised
state water quality standards. FY 2001 annual performance data are complete.
Data Source: Regional reporting.
Data Quality: Headquarters compiles the data and queries the regions as needed. Regions collect data from their
client states and report to headquarters once yearly. EPA headquarters and regions annually review the water quality
standards (WQS) data submitted by states.
Improvements: None.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-18)
Cumulative number of tribes with water quality standards adopted and approved. (APG 11)
Performance Database: No formal database exists. FY 2001 annual performance data are complete.
Data Source: Regional reporting.
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 2 - Clean and Safe Water (continued)
Data Quality: Headquarters compiles the data and queries the regions as needed. Regions collect data from their
client tribes and report to headquarters once yearly. EPA headquarters and regions annually review the data submitted
by tribes.
Improvements: None.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-19)
• Major point sources are covered by current permits. (APG 14)
• Minor point sources are covered by current permits. (APG 14)
Performance Database: Permit Compliance System (PCS). FY 2001 annual performance data are complete.
Data Source: Regions and states enter data into PCS.
Data Quality: The Office of Water (OW) uses data in PCS to determine which permits have not exceeded their
expiration dates. As part of the QA/QC process to improve data quality in PCS, OW generated state-by-state
reports listing what appears in PCS for key data fields for facilities and discharge pipes (name, address, Standard
Industrial Classification [SIC] code, latitude/longitude, Hydrologic Unit Code [HUC], reach, flow, issuance date,
expiration date, application received date, effective date, etc.). EPA distributed these reports in January 2001 to state
and regional PCS, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), and geographic information system
(GIS) coordinators to allow states to "see what EPA sees" when it views PCS data. Where discrepancies exist
between state and PCS data, OW is identifying such discrepancies and making corrections in PCS, where necessary.
Additionally, many states have been collecting and verifying NPDES data on their own but maintain these data in
separate state-level systems (electronic and hard copy). EPA plans to populate fields in PCS that are currently blank
with existing state-level data provided by states.
Office of the Inspector General (OIG) audits 8100076 (March 13,1998) and 8100089 (March 31,1998) discussed
the need for current data in PCS. OW is categorizing the form in which the data exist at the state level (e.g., currently
in PCS, currently in a separate state system and/or currently in hard copy only). As EPA creates a picture of national
PCS data availability, staff are working with individual states and regions to tailor approaches to getting key data into
PCS. OW is offering data upload, data entry, and, if necessary, data compilation support to states and anticipates
completion of the project by the end of FY 2002.
There are significant data gaps for minor facilities and discrepancies between state databases and PCS.
Improvements: EPA headquarters is providing contractor assistance to improve the data quality of PCS. By 2003,
PCS is scheduled to be modernized to make it easier to use and to ensure that it includes all needed data to manage
NPDES programs.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-19)
• Loading reductions of toxics by facilities subject to effluent guidelines promulgated between 1992 and 1999,
as predicted by model projection. (APG 13)
• Loading reductions of conventional pollutants by facilities subject to effluent guidelines promulgated between
1992 and 1999, as predicted by model projection. (APG 13)
• Loading reductions of non-conventional pollutants by facilities subject to effluent guidelines promulgated
between 1992 and 1999, as predicted by model projection. (APG 13)
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-9
-------
Goal 2 - Clean and Safe Water (continued)
Performance Database: No one database provides this information. PCS is used for available information on
permitted facilities, including SIC codes, flow, and location data. Other databases that may be used include the Clean
Water Needs Survey for treatment-level information, the storm water Notice of Intent (NOI) database to determine
facilities covered under storm water general permits, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) Rainfall Database for precipitation information, and STORET for water quality information. The data in
these databases will be used to model loadings from NPDES permitted facilities. However, data are not available
for all categories of dischargers or for all dischargers in each category. Data are particularly lacking for storm water
dischargers.
Data Sources: Regions and states enter data into PCS, the Needs Survey, and STORET. NOI data are provided by
applicants for coverage under general permits (both storm water and non-storm water permits), and limited data
elements are entered into PCS by some states. Where EPA is the permitting authority, EPA contractors enter storm
water NOI data into a separate database. EPA has collected effluent guidelines development data for various
industrial categories. NOAA enters data into the Rainfall Database. EPA is collecting best management practices
effectiveness data from various studies. EPA is collecting combined sewer overflow (CSO) data from states for
required reports to Congress; these data should ultimately reside in PCS.
Data Quality: EPA reviews critical data submitted by states. Some databases, such as STORET, require
documentation of the quality of the data along with the data entry. With respect to PCS, EPA has a project under
way to work with states to improve the data in PCS. (See "Improvement" section for previous performance
measures "Major/Minor Point Sources Covered by Current Permits). Load reductions are to be estimated by
modeling the various categories of sources. Actual data will be used to calibrate and verify the models used. Data
quality review procedures are listed under the narrative for the previous performance measures "Major/Minor Point
Sources Covered by Current Permits."
There are significant data gaps in PCS, including reliability issues, for minor facilities, general permits, and specific
categories of discharges, such as CAFOs. Additionally, neither monitoring nor flow data are required for certain
categories of general permits. The Agency, therefore, is not able to provide sufficient information to measure
loadings reductions for all of the approximately 550,000 facilities that fall under the NPDES Program.
Improvements: EPA headquarters is providing contractor assistance to improve the data quality of PCS. By 2003
PCS is scheduled to be modernized to make it easier to use. As the modernized system is being developed,
additional efforts are under way to bolster comprehensive data collection to ensure that the modernized system
includes data needed to manage NPDES programs. In FY 2002 the Office of Wastewater Management (OWM)
plans to develop a comprehensive Action Plan for modeling point source loadings from a variety of sources. OWM
will develop loadings reduction targets for each of the identified sources. In general the methodology might have to
be different for each source, based on what data are available, the difficulty in modeling in the absence of existing
data, and the difficulty in regularly updating the methodology as more data become available. The strategy is to
move progressively from the lowest measurement level (programmatic actions) toward the highest level (direct
environmental measurements) over time. Levels include the following: I. Program Implementation, such as number
of permits issued; II. Controls Implementation, such as number of best management practices in place;
III. Estimated Load Reductions Through Modeling; IV Measure Actual Load Reductions, such as samplingplant
influent and, effluent; and V Monitor Water Quality Improvement by in-stream measurement. However, sufficient
real-time data might never exist to pursue national use of Level IV and V data.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-20)
Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) projects that have initiated operations. (APG 15)
B-10 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 2 - Clean and Safe Water (continued)
Performance Database: CWSRF National Information Management System. FY 2001 annual performance data
are complete, http://wwwepa.gov/r5water/cwsrf/
Data Source: Reporting by municipal and other facility operators. Entry by state regulatory agency personnel and
EPA regional staff. Collection and reporting once yearly.
Data Quality: EPA headquarters is responsible for compiling the data and querying regions as needed. Regions are
responsible for collecting the data from their client states and reporting the data to headquarters once yearly. EPA
headquarters and regions annually review the data submitted by states.
Improvements: This system has been in effect since 1996. It is updated on an annual basis, and database fields are
changed or added as needed.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-19)
Acres of habitat restored and protected nationwide since 1987 as part of the National Estuary Program (NEP).
(APG 12)
Performance Database: A simple database/tracking system is being developed to document the number of acres
of habitat restored and protected. Key fields will include the type of action (e.g., protection or restoration) and
habitat type (e.g. estuarine, riparian). FY 2001 annual performance data are complete.
Data Source: NEP documents, such as annual work plans (which contain achievements made in the previous year)
and annual progress reports, are used along with other implementation tracking materials to document the number
of acres of habitat restored and protected. EPA then aggregates the data provided by each NEP to arrive at a
national total for the entire program.
Data Quality: The staff of the NEP prepare primary databased on their own reports and on data supplied by
other partnering agencies/organizations (that are responsible for implementing the action resulting in habitat
protection and restoration). Aggregate data are compiled through a contractor review of the NEP documentation.
The NEP staff are requested to follow guidance provided by EPA to prepare their reports, and to verify the
numbers they provide. EPA and a contractor then confirm that the national total accurately reflects the information
submitted by each program. Because this is a new annual performance measure that is still being refined, audits or
quality reviews have not yet been conducted.
It is still too early to determine the full extent of data limitations. Current data limitations include information that
might be reported inconsistently (based on different interpretations of the protection and restoration definitions),
acreage that might be miscalculated or misreported, and acreage that might be double-counted (same parcel might
also be counted by a partnering/implementing agency or a parcel might need to be replanted multiple years). In
addition, measuring the number of acres of habitat might not directly correlate to improvements in the health of the
habitat reported but is rather a measure of on-the-ground progress made by the NEPs.
Improvements: The Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds developed a standardized format for data
reporting and compilation. In addition to providing the reporting matrix, habitat protection and restoration activities
were defined and habitat categories specified to assist in providing consistency of reporting. The office has also
designed a web page that highlights habitat loss/alteration in an educational fashion with graphics and images that
reflect specific NEP reports (but does not illustrate aggregate data at the national level). This web page will enable
EPA to provide a visual means of communicating NEP performance and habitat protection and restoration
progress to a wide range of stakeholders and decision-makers. In the future EPA will examine the possibility of
georeferencing the data in a GIS.
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-ll
-------
Goal 2 - Clean and Safe Water (continued)
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-18)
Watersheds that have greater than 80 percent of assessed waters meeting all water quality standards. (APG 10)
Performance Database: Watershed Assessment Tracking Environmental Results (WATERS). WATERS is used to
summarize water quality information at the watershed level. For purposes of this national summary, "watersheds"
are equivalent to 8-digit hydrologic unit codes (HUCs), of which there are 2,262 nationwide. State Clean Water Act
section (CWA) 305 (b) data are submitted every 2 years, and many states provide annual updates. Data to be used for
the FY2001 Annual Report include state submissions from spring 2000. FY2001 annual performance data are
complete, http://wwwepa.gov/305b/
Data Source: State CWA section 305(b) reporting. The data used by a state to assess water quality and prepare its
305(b) report include ambient monitoring results from multiple sources (state, U.S. Geological Survey, volunteer,
academic), as well as predictive tools like water quality models. Because states compile diverse data to support water
quality assessments, EPA uses these data to present a snapshot of water quality as reported by the states but does not
use the data to report trends in water quality. EPAs OW and Office of Research and Development have established a
monitoring and design team that is working with states on a 3- to 5-year project to recommend a design for a
national probability-based monitoring network that could be used to provide both status and trends in water quality
at the state and national levels.
Data Quality: QA/QC of data provided by states pursuant to individual state assessments (under state CWA
section 305(b)) is dependent on individual state procedures. Numerous system-level checks are built into WATERS
based on the business rules associated with assessment information. States are then given the opportunity to review
the information in WATERS to ensure it accurately reflects the data they submitted. Detailed data exchange guidance
and training are also provided to the states. The sufficiency threshold for inclusion in this measure requires that 20
percent of stream miles in an 8-digit HUC be assessed.
Data are not representative of comprehensive national assessments because states do not yet employ a monitoring
design that characterizes all waters in each reporting cycle. States do not use a consistent suite of water quality
indicators to assess attainment with water quality standards. For example, indicators of aquatic life use support range
from biological community assessments to levels of dissolved oxygen to concentrations of toxic pollutants. State
assessments of water quality may include uncertainties associated with derived or modeled data. Differences in
monitoring designs among and within states prevent the Agency from aggregating water quality assessments at the
national level with known statistical confidence.
Improvements: Numerous independent reports have cited that weaknesses in monitoring programs and the
reporting of monitoring data undermine EPAs ability to depict the condition of the Nation's waters and to support
scientifically sound water program decisions. The most recent reports include the 1998 Report of the Federal Advisory
Committee on the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program; the March 15,2000, General Accounting Office report
Water Quality: Key DedsionsUmited by Inconsistent andlncomplete Data; and the 2001 National Academy of Sciences report
Assessing the TMDL Approach to Water Quality Management.
In response to these evaluations, EPA has been working with states and other stakeholders to improve: (1) data
coverage so that state reports reflect the condition of all waters of the state, (2) data consistency to facilitate
comparison and aggregation of state data to the national level, and (3) documentation so that data limitations and
discrepancies are fully understood by data users. First, EPA enhanced two existing data management tools (STORET
and the Assessment Database) that include documentation of data quality information. Second, EPA has developed a
GIS tool called WATERS that integrates many databases, including STORET, the Assessment Database, and a new
water quality standards database. These integrated databases facilitate comparison and understanding of differences
B-12 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 2 - Clean and Safe Water (continued)
among state standards, monitoring activities, and assessment results. Third, EPA and states have developed the
guidance document Consolidated'AssessmentandUstingMethodology—A Compendium of Best Practices, intended to facilitate
increased consistency in monitoring program design and the data and decision criteria used to support water quality
assessments.
OW is working with federal agencies, states, and tribes to improve the database that supports this management
measure by addressing the underlying methods of monitoring water quality and assessing the data. OW also is
working with partners to enhance monitoring networks to achieve comprehensive coverage of all waters, use a
consistent suite of core water quality indicators (supplemented with additional indicators for specific water quality
questions), and document key data elements and decision criteria through electronic data systems and assessment
methodologies. OW is using a variety of mechanisms to implement these improvements, including data management
systems, guidance, stakeholder meetings, training and technical assistance, program reviews, and negotiations.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
Goal 3 - Safe Food
Appendix B describes the quality of the data used to measure EPAs performance. For each of the 10 EPA Strategic
Goals, this appendix describes (1) the performance measures (PMs), (2) the database(s) supporting the PMs, (3) the
source of the database(s), (4) the quality of the data, (5) planned improvements to the data or database(s), and (6) any
material inadequacies.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-26)
• New chemicals. (APG 17)
• New uses. (APG 17)
Performance Database: Pesticide Regulatory Action Tracking System (PRATS). The Office of Pesticide Programs
(OPP) maintains PRATS. The system is designed to track regulatory data and studies submitted by the registrant
(pesticide manufacturer/producer) in support of a pesticide's registration application. OPP staff update the data
regularly. Output counts are available in October of the next fiscal year.
Data Source: OPP staff update the status of the submissions and studies as they are received and as work is
completed by the reviewers. The status indicates whether the application is ready for review, the application is in
the process of review, or the review has been completed.
Data Quality: These are program outputs. OPP staff and management review the program outputs in accordance
with established policies in place for the registration program.
Improvements: The Office of Pesticide Programs Information Network (OPPIN), which is still under
development, will consolidate various OPP program databases. New uses and new chemicals are a surrogate for
pesticide risk. EPA is working internally, as well as with stakeholders from environmental organizations and industry,
to develop outcome data and measures that more accurately depict risk from pesticides. Quantitatively assessing
human risks from pesticide exposure is challenging in part because pesticides are pervasive in the environment and
there are many routes of exposure.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-26)
Register safer chemicals andbiopesticides. (APG 16)
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-13
-------
Goal 3 - Safe Food (continued)
Performance Database: PRATS. OPP maintains PRATS, which is designed to track regulatory data and studies
submitted by the registrant (pesticide manufacturer/producer) in support of a pesticide's registration application.
OPP staff update the data regularly. Output counts are available in October of the next fiscal year.
Data Source: OPP staff update the status of the submissions and studies as they are received and as work is
completed by the reviewers. The status indicates whether the application is ready for review, the application is in the
process of review, or the review has been completed.
Data Quality: These are programs outputs. OPP staff and management review the program outputs in accordance
with established policy for the registration of reduced risk pesticides as set forth in Pesticide Regulation Notice 97-3,
September 4,1997.
Improvements: OPPIN, which is still under development, will consolidate various OPP program databases. The
registration of safer pesticides is a surrogate for measuring pesticide risk. EPA is working internally, as well as with
stakeholders from environmental organizations and industry, to develop outcome data and measures that more
accurately depict risk from pesticides. Quantitatively assessing human health risks from pesticide exposure is
challenging in part because pesticides are pervasive in the environment and there are many routes of exposure.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-27)
• Product reregistration. (APG 18)
• Reregistration Eligibility Decisions (REDs). (APG 18)
Performance Database: PRATS. OPP maintains PRATS, which tracks information submitted by industry in
support of a pesticide's registration application. OPP staff update the data regularly. Output counts are available in
October of the next fiscal year.
Data Source: OPP staff update the status of each action as it is completed by the reviewer.
Data Quality: These are program outputs. OPP staff and management review the program outputs in accordance
with established policies in place for the reregistration program.
Improvements: OPPIN is still under development and will consolidate various OPP program databases. EPA is
working internally, as well as with stakeholders from environmental organizations and industry, to develop outcome
data and measures that more accurately depict risk from pesticides.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-27)
• Tolerance reassessments for top 20 foods eaten by children. (APG 18)
• Tolerance reassessments. (APG 18)
Performance Database: Tolerance Reassessment Tracking System (TORTS). TORTS is an OPP in-house system
that contains records on all 9,721 tolerances subject to reassessment. It includes the total number of tolerances
reassessed by fiscal year, the outcomes of reassessments (number of tolerances raised, lowered, revoked, or
unchanged), and the appropriate priority group for the tolerance. Additionally, it breaks out the tolerances for specific
chemical groups such as organophosphates, carbamates, organochlorines, carcinogens, high-hazard inerts, children's
foods, and minor uses. OPP staff update the data regularly. Output counts are available in October of the next
fiscal year.
B-14 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 3 - Safe Food (continued)
Data Source: OPP staff update the status of each action as it is completed by the reviewer.
Data Quality: These are program outputs. OPP staff and management review the program outputs in accordance
with established policies in place for reregistration/tolerance reassessment activities.
Improvements: EPA is working internally, as well as with stakeholders from environmental organizations and
industry, to develop outcome data and measures that more accurately depict risk from pesticides.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
Goal 4 - Preventing Pollution and Reducing Risk in Communities,
Homes, Workplaces, and Ecosystems
Appendix B describes the quality of the data used to measure EPAs performance. For each of the 10 EPA Strategic
Goals, this appendix describes (1) the performance measures (PMs), (2) the database(s) supporting the PMs, (3) the
source of the database(s), (4) the quality of the data, (5) planned improvements to the data or database(s), and (6) any
material inadequacies.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-35)
• Notice of Commencements. (APG 19)
• Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) Premanufacture Notice Reviews. (APG 19)
Performance Database: Output measure; no internal tracking system.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-36)
Through chemical testing program, obtain test data for high production volume chemicals on master testing list
(Chemical Right-to-Know Initiative). (APG 20)
Performance Database: Output measure; no internal tracking system.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-36)
Students/staff experiencing improved indoor air quality (TAQ) in schools. (APG 22)
Performance Database: Survey of representative sample of schools. There are more than 110,000 public and
private schools in the United States. Using commercially available and government databases of the universe of
schools, a random sample of schools will be mailed an OMB-approved questionnaire. Data are preliminary (because
this a new survey); complete data will likely be available for the FY 2002 Annual Report. Because OMB approval
expires after 3 years, the program will likely conduct one additional survey before 2005. No web link is available.
Data Source: EPA plans to use a contractor to contact a representative number of schools and mail the
questionnaire. School personnel will fill out the questionnaire and send it back to the contractor. The contractor will
collate the data and produce a report.
Data Quality: The survey will be designed, conducted, and analyzed in accordance with approved Agency
procedures. The contractor and EPA will review the data for completeness and quality. Results of the survey are
subject to the inherent limitations of self-reporting on the questionnaire.
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-15
-------
Goal 4 - Preventing Pollution and Reducing Risk in Communities,
Homes, Workplaces, and Ecosystems (continued)
Improvements: A survey was conducted in FY 2001 to determine implementation and adoption of good IAQ
practices in school buildings, including use of EPA's "Indoor Air Quality Tools for Schools" kit. EPA expects results
of the survey to be available by the end of FY 2002. This survey will provide the Agency with a solid estimate of
the number of schools adopting and implementing good IAQ practices. Prior to this survey, EPA tracked the
number of schools receiving the kit and estimated the population of the school to determine the number of
students/staff experiencing improved IAQ without the qualitative information of actual adoption and
implementation of good IAQ practices.
EPA is compiling a database to better track the number of schools that have received "Tools for Schools" kits and
the number of schools that have implemented the tools. The database will be enhanced in FY 2002 to allow for
accurate electronic reporting by EPA's regional offices.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-37)
Reduction of TRI non-recycled wastes. (APG 23)
Performance Database: Toxic Release Inventory System (THIS). Performance data are not available currently; data
will be available in spring 2003. http://wwwepa.gov/tri/
Data Source: Data reported to EPA from facilities meeting criteria specified in section 313 of the Emergency
Preparedness and Community Right-to-Know Act. Following thorough quality assurance review and data processing,
data are made publicly available through an annual Public Data Release report and associated publicly accessible
databases.
Data Quality: The quality of TRI data depends on the quality of the data submitted by the reporting facility.
Although EPA has no direct control over the quality of the submitted data, the Agency does assist reporting facilities
in improving their estimates. EPA also verifies that the facilities' information is correctly entered into the TRI
database.
Improvements: EPA is developing regulations for improving reporting of source reduction activities by TRI
releasers.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-37)
• Millions of tons of municipal solid waste diverted. (APG 24)
• Daily per capita generation of municipal solidwaste. (APG 24)
Performance Database: In the nonhazardous waste program, no national databases are in place or planned. Data
are currently unavailable; they are expected September 30,2003.
Data Source: The baseline numbers for municipal solid waste source reduction and recycling are developed using a
materials flow methodology that employs data largely from the Department of Commerce. The methodology is
provided in an EPA report titled Characterisation of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States.
Data Quality: Quality assurance and quality control are provided by the Department of Commerce's internal
procedures and systems. The report prepared by the Agency is then reviewed by a number of experts for accuracy
and soundness. The report, including the baseline numbers and annual rates of recycling and per capita municipal
B-16 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 4 - Preventing Pollution and Reducing Risk in Communities,
Homes, Workplaces, and Ecosystems (continued)
solid waste generation, is widely accepted among experts. Various assumptions are factored into the analysis to
develop progress on each measure.
Improvements: Because these numbers are widely reported and accepted by experts, no new efforts to improve the
data or the methodology have been identified or are necessary.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-38)
Number of environmental assessments for Tribes. (APG 25)
Performance Database: The American Indian Environmental Office is developing a new information system that
will be used to access baseline environmental information. This information system will draw together environmental
information on tribes from the existing EPA databases, such as those from the Office of Water and EPA regions, as
well as databases from other federal agencies. All the data will be accessed on a per tribe basis so that environmental
information can be queried by tribe, by state, by EPA region, or nationally. Information that is geo-referenced will be
displayed graphically on an electronic map of tribal reservation boundaries. The information system also will have a
narrative profile description of environmental information and management activities for each tribe. The structure of
the system is complete and expected to be fully populated with pro files for all federally re cognized tribes by
FY 2005. Public access to information through the Internet cannot be provided until EPA completes consultation
with the tribes but is expected in FY 2002.
Data Source: The data sources will be existing federal databases that are available nationally, from both EPA and
other agencies, supplemented by electronic data sources collected from the EPA regions. These data sources will be
identified and referenced in the system application.
Data Quality: The quality of the external databases will be described but not ranked. A Quality Management Plan is
projected for development as Agency-wide guidance is developed. Each tribe will have the opportunity to review
and comment on its Tribal Profile. Mechanisms for adjusting data will be supplied. The data limitations of the Tribal
Profiles are subject to the underlying existing database systems referenced.
Improvements: Statistical analyses on a national level are planned using the baseline data collected and reported on a
per tribe basis. EPA will be able to develop statistically valid reports on whether tribes are underserved (generally,
they are) or overserved compared to the Nation as a whole in a number of areas, such as wastewater treatment,
drinking water, and solid waste services.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
Goal 5 - BetterWaste Management, Restoration of Contaminated Waste Sites, and
Emergency Response
Appendix B describes the quality of the data used to measure EPAs performance. For each of the 10 EPA Strategic
Goals, this appendix describes (1) the performance measures (PMs), (2) the database(s) supporting the PMs, (3) the
source of the database(s), (4) the quality of the data, (5) planned improvements to the data or database(s), and (6) any
material inadequacies.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart pages 11-47,11-48,11-50)
• Superfund construction completions. (APG 26)
• Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) conduct 70 percent of the work at new construction starts. (APG 27)
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-17
-------
Goal 5 - BetterWaste Management, Restoration of Contaminated Waste Sites, and
Emergency Response (continued)
• Ensure fairness by making Orphan Share Offers at 100 percent of all eligible sites settlement negotiations for
response work. (APG 27)
• Refer to the Department of Justice (DOJ), settle, or write off 100 percent of Statute of Limitations (SOLs)
cases for Superfund sites with total unaddressed past costs equal to or greater than $200,000 and report value
of costs recovered. (APG 28)
• Percent of Federal facilities for which final offers are made that meet Agency policy and guidance. (APG 32)
• Percent of Federal facilities with final offers made within 18 months. (APG 32)
• Evaluate liability concerns—100 percent of Prospective Purchaser Agreement requests addressed up to a
maximum of 40 requests. (APG 34)
Performance Database: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information
System (CERCLIS). The Agency uses CERCLIS to track, store, and report Superfund site information. Data are
complete for assessment of FY 2001 performance.
Data Source: Automated EPA system; headquarters and regional offices enter data into CERCLIS on a rollingbasis.
Data Quality: To ensure data accuracy and control, the following administrative controls are in place: (1) Superfund I
Oil Program Implementation Manual (SPIM), the program management manual that details what data must be reported;
(2) Report Specifications, which are published for each report detailing how reported data are calculated; (3) Coding
Guide, which contains technical instructions to such data users as regional Information Management Coordinators
(IMCs), program personnel, report owners, and data input personnel; (4) Quality Assurance (QA) Unit Testing, an
extensive QA check against report specifications; (5) QA Third Party Testing, an extensive test made by an
independent QA tester to ensure that the report produces data in conformance with the report specifications;
(6) Regional CERCLIS Data Entry Internal Control Plan, which includes: (a) regional policies and procedures for
entering data into CERCLIS, (b) a review process to ensure that all Superfund accomplishments are supported by
source documentation, (c) delegation of authorities for approval of data input into CERCLIS, and (d) procedures to
ensure that reported accomplishments meet accomplishment definitions; and (7) a historical lockout feature so that
changes in past fiscal year data can be changed only by approved and designated personnel and are logged to a
change log report.
The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) conducted an audit and the General Accounting Office (GAO)
completed a review to assess the validity of the data in CERCLIS. The OIG audit report, Superfund Construction
Completion Reporting (No. E1SGF7-05-0102-8100030), verified the accuracy of the information that the Agency was
providing to Congress and the public. The OIG report concluded that the Agency "has good management controls
to ensure accuracy of the information that is reported" and "Congress and the public can rely upon the information
EPA provides regarding construction completions." GAO's report, Superfund Information on the Status of Sites (GAO/
RCED-98-241), estimated that the cleanup status of National Priority List sites reported by CERCLIS is accurate for
95 percent of the sites.
The OIG annually reviews the end-of-year Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA) data, in an informal process, to verify the data supporting the performance measures. Typically there
are no published results.
No data limitations have been identified.
Improvements: In 2003 the Agency will continue its efforts begun in 1999 to improve the Superfund Program's
technical information by incorporating more site remedy selection, risk, removal response, and community
involvement information into CERCLIS. Efforts to share information among the federal, state, and tribal programs
to further enhance the Agency's efforts to efficiently identify, evaluate, and remediate Superfund hazardous waste sites
B-18 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 5 - BetterWaste Management, Restoration of Contaminated Waste Sites, and
Emergency Response (continued)
will continue. In 2003 the Agency will also establish data quality objectives for program planning purposes and to
ascertain the organization's information needs for the next 5 years. Adjustments will be made to EPA's current
architecture and business processes to better meet those needs.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-47)
Provide finality for small contributors by entering into de minimis settlements and report the number of settlers.
(APG 27)
Performance Database: EPA headquarters maintains a database specifically to track the number of parties at
de minimis settlements. Data are complete for assessment of FY 2001 performance.
Data Source: Manual and automated EPA systems; headquarters and regions enter numbers.
Data Quality: Regional personnel enter data, and headquarters checks a sample.
Improvements: None.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-48)
• High priority Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) facilities with human exposure to toxins
controlled. (APG 29)
• High priority RCRA facilities with toxic releases to groundwater controlled. (APG 29)
Performance Database: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information System (RCRAInfo). RCRAInfo is
the national database that supports EPA's RCRA program. RCRAInfo contains information on entities (generically
referred to as "handlers") engaged in hazardous waste generation and management activities regulated under the
portion of RCRA that provides for regulation of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo has several different modules,
including a Corrective Action Module that tracks the status of facilities that require, or might require, corrective
actions. A "yes" or "no" entry is made in the database with respect to meeting corrective action indicators.
Supporting documentation and reference materials are maintained in regional and state files.
Human exposures controlled and toxic releases to groundwater controlled are used to summarize and report on the
facility-wide environmental conditions at the RCRA Corrective Action Program's highest priority facilities. The
environmental indicators are used to track the RCRA Program's progress on getting the highest priority contaminated
sites under control. Known and suspected sitewide conditions are evaluated using a series of simple questions and
flow-chart logic to arrive at a reasonable, defensible determination. These questions were issued as Interim Final
Guidance on February 5,1999. Lead regulators for the site (authorized state or EPA) make the environmental
indicator determination; however, facilities or their consultants may assist EPA in the evaluation by providing
information on the current environmental conditions.
Data are complete for assessment of FY 2001 performance. http://wwwepa.gov/enviro/index_java.html
Data Source: EPA regions and authorized states enter data on a rolling basis.
Data Quality: States and regions, which generate the data, manage data quality control related to timeliness and
accuracy (that is, the environmental conditions and determinations are correctly reflected by the data). Within
RCRAInfo the application software enforces structural controls that ensure that high-priority national components of
the data are properly entered. RCRAInfo documentation, which is available to all users on-line, provides guidance to
www.epa.gov/ocfo B-19
-------
Goal 5 - BetterWaste Management, Restoration of Contaminated Waste Sites, and
Emergency Response (continued)
facilitate the generation and interpretation of data. Training on use of RCRAInfo is provided on a regular basis,
usually annually, depending on the nature of systems changes and user needs.
GAO's 1995 report on EPA's Hazardous Waste Information System reviewed whether national RCRA information
systems support meeting the primary objective of helping EPA and states manage the hazardous waste program.
Recommendations coincide with ongoing internal efforts (WIN/Informed) to improve the definitions of data
collected, ensure that data collected provide critical information, and minimize the burden on states.
No data limitations have been identified. As discussed above, environmental indicator determinations are made by
the authorized states and EPA regions based on a series of standard questions and entered directly into RCRAInfo.
EPA has provided guidance and training to states and regions to help ensure consistency in those determinations.
High-priority facilities are monitored on a facility-by-facility basis, and the QA/QC procedures identified above are
in place to help ensure data validity.
Improvements: EPA has successfully implemented new tools for managing environmental information to support
federal and state programs, replacing the old data systems (the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information
System [RCRIS] and the Biennial Reporting System) with RCRAInfo. RCRAInfo allows for tracking of information
on the regulated universe of RCRA hazardous waste handlers and for characterization of facility status, regulated
activities, and compliance history. 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-enabled, providing a convenient user interface for federal, state, and local managers and
encouraging development of in-house expertise in order to control costs. RCRAInfo also uses commercial off-the-
shelf software to report directly from database tables.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart pages 11-49, H-51)
• Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) cleanups completed. (APG 30)
• Percentage of Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) significant operational compliance with leak detection
requirements. (APG 36)
• Percentage of USTs in significant operational compliance with spills, overfill and corrosion protection
regulations. (APG 36)
Performance Database: EPA does not maintain a database for this information. Data are complete for assessment
of FY 2001 performance.
Data Source: Designated state agencies submit semiannual progress reports to the EPA regional offices.
Data Quality: EPA regional offices verify the data and then forward them to EPA headquarters, where staff
examine the data and resolve any discrepancies with regional offices. The data are displayed in a document on a
region-by-region basis, which allows regional staff to re-verify their data. The process relies on the accuracy and
completeness of state records.
Improvements: None.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-49)
• Cumulative site assessments. (APG 31)
B-20 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 5 - BetterWaste Management, Restoration of Contaminated Waste Sites, and
Emergency Response (continued)
• Cumulative jobs generated. (APG 31)
• Cumulative leveraging of cleanup and redevelopment funds. (APG 31)
Performance Database: The Brownfields Management System (BMS) is used to evaluate environmental and
economics-related results, such as properties assessed, acres cleaned up, and jobs generated. BMS uses data gathered
from Brownfields pilots' quarterly reports and from the EPA regions. CERCLIS records regional accomplishments
on Brownfields assessments in the Brownfields module. This database module tracks Targeted Brownfields
Assessments (TBAs) on a property-specific basis. The module contains information such as the property's operational
status (e.g., "active" or "inactive"), prior use (e.g., "disposal," "production facility," or "midnight dump"), the actual
start and completion dates for the TEA, the phase of the TEA, and the outcome or result of the TEA. Data are not
currently complete; FY 2001 performance data are expected by April 2002.
Data Source: EPA headquarters, regional staff and contractors enter data on a rolling basis. Data are derived from
quarterly grant recipient reports on Pilot and TEA projects.
Data Quality: Verification relies on reviews by regional staff responsible for pilot cooperative agreements or
Brownfields cooperative agreements and contracts.
The program and external organizations have conducted several data quality reviews. GAO conducted the most
recent, Brownfields: Information on the Programs of EPA and Selected States (GAO-01-52, December 15,2000). GAO
recommended that EPA continue to review data reported by recipients before the Agency's new guidelines for
results became effective and make any corrections needed to ensure that the data are consistent with the current
guidelines. GAO also recommended that EPA regions monitor and work to improve recipients' reporting of data
on key results measures.
The reporting of results of the Brownfields pilots is subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act and attendant OMB
regulations governing Information Collection Requests (ICRs), as well as the Agency's assistance regulations.
Consequently the Agency is limited to obtaining information from pilot recipients on specific accomplishments
attained with grant funds, such as properties assessed (40 CFR35.6650(b)(l)). In addition, EPA may not require
private sector entities, which do not receive EPA financial assistance, to provide information relating to such
accomplishment measures as redevelopment dollars invested or numbers of jobs created. These constraints might
lead to an under reporting of accomplishments.
Improvements: In September 1999 EPA headquarters issued guidance to the regions to standardize quarterly
reporting of accomplishment measures for newly awarded and amended assessment grants. This guidance was
developed to ensure that the standardized information collected fell within the scope of regulations and applicable
OMB controls for quarterly reporting by assessment pilot recipients. EPA also is working with recipients to
encourage the use of standardized reporting through workshops and training. To improve recipients' reporting of
data on key results measures, EPA has implemented GAO's recommendation that the Agency make it clear to
recipients that follow-on awards depend on reported results.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-50)
Provide the SITE Program Report to Congress. (APG 33)
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-21
-------
Goal 5 - BetterWaste Management, Restoration of Contaminated Waste Sites, and
Emergency Response (continued)
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-51)
Percent of RCRA hazardous waste management facilities with permits or other approved controls in place.
(APG 35)
Performance Database: RCRAInfo is the national database that supports EPA's RCRA program. RCRAInfo
contains information on entities (generically referred to as "handlers") engaged in hazardous waste generation and
management activities regulated under the portion of RCRA that provides for regulation of hazardous waste.
RCRAInfo has several different modules, including status of RCRA facilities in the RCRA permitting universe. Data
are complete for assessment of FY2001 performance. http://wwwepa.gov/enviro/index_java.html
Data Source: EPA regions and authorized states enter data on a rolling basis.
Data Quality: States and regions, which generate the data, manage data quality control related to timeliness and
accuracy (that is, the environmental conditions and determinations are correctly reflected by the data). Within
RCRAInfo the application software enforces structural controls that ensure that high-priority national components of
the data are properly entered. RCRAInfo documentation, which is available to all users on-line, provides guidance to
facilitate the creation and interpretation of data. Training on use of RCRAInfo is provided on a regular basis, usually
annually, depending on the nature of systems changes and user needs.
GAO's 1995 report on EPA's Hazardous Waste Information System reviewed whether national RCRA information
systems support meeting the primary objective of helping EPA and states manage the hazardous waste program.
Recommendations coincide with ongoing internal efforts (WIN/Informed) to improve the definitions of data
collected, ensure that data collected provide critical information, and minimize the burden on states. No data
limitations have been identified.
Improvements: EPA has successfully implemented new tools for managing environmental information to support
federal and state programs, replacing the old data systems (the RCRIS and the Biennial Reporting System) with RCRAInfo.
RCRAInfo allows for tracking of information on the regulated universe of RCRA hazardous waste handlers and for
characterization of facility status, regulated activities, and compliance history. 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-enabled, providing a convenient user interface for
federal, state, and local managers and encouraging development of in-house expertise in order to control costs.
RCRAInfo also uses commercial off-the-shelf software to report directly from database tables.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
Goal 6 - Reduction of Global and Cross-Border Environmental Risks
Appendix B describes the quality of the data used to measure EPA's performance. For each of the 10 EPA Strategic
Goals, this appendix describes (1) the performance measures (PMs), (2) the database(s) supporting the PMs, (3) the
source of the database(s), (4) the quality of the data, (5) planned improvements to the data or database(s), and (6) any
material inadequacies.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-58)
People in the Mexico border area protected from health risks because of adequate water and wastewater sanitation
systems funded through the Border Environmental Infrastructure Fund, (cumulative) (APG 37)
Performance Database: No formal database exists. FY 2001 annual performance data are complete.
B-22 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 6 - Reduction of Global and Cross-Border Environmental Risks (continued)
Data Source: Population figures from 1990 U.S. Census. Data for both U.S. and Mexican populations served by
"certified" water/wastewater treatment improvements from the Border Environment Cooperation Commission
(BECC). Data on projects funded from the North American Development Bank (NADBank), Status Report on the
Water-Wastewater Infrastructure Program for the U.S.-Mexico Borderlands, January 2001.
Data Quality: Headquarters evaluates quarterly reports from EPA regional offices on these drinking water and
wastewater sanitation projects. EPA regional representatives attend meetings of the certifying and financing entities
for border projects (BECC and NADBank) and conduct site visits of projects under way to ensure the accuracy of
information.
Improvements: None.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-59)
Concentration trends of toxic polycholorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in Great Lakes top predator fish. (APG 38)
Performance Database: Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) base monitoring program.
Data Source: GLNPO's ongoingbase monitoring program, which has included work with cooperating
organizations such as the Great Lakes States, U.S. Geological Survey, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Data Quality: GLNPO has in place a quality management system that conforms to the EPA Quality Management
Order. GLNPO is audited every 3 years in accordance with federal policy for quality management. GLNPO's
quality management system has been given "outstanding" ratings in previous peer and management reviews. Base
monitoring programs are audited every 2 years; this program is to be audited in 2002 with special emphasis on the
field sampling design and procedures.
There is greater uncertainty regarding the representativeness of data pertaining to nearshore areas because of the
greater variability of the nearshore environment. GLNPO is seeking documentation of how samples are collected
and what they represent in order to quantify uncertainty for data in each reported area. Limitations of the field
sampling design will be addressed through the field audits in 2002. The field sampling aspects of the program are
voluntary partnerships with the states, thus limiting federal oversight.
Improvements: The Great Lakes Environmental Database (GLENDA) is a significant new system with enhanced
capabilities. Existing and future fish data will be added to GLENDA.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-59)
Concentration trends of toxic chemicals in the air (including PCBs, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons [PAHs], and
pesticides). (APG 38)
Performance Database: GLNPO Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network (IADN) operated jointly with
Canada. FY2001 annual performance date are complete.
Data Source: GLNPO and Canada are the principal sources of the data. Data also are collected through in-kind
support and information sharing with other federal agencies, Great Lakes states, and Canada.
Data Quality: GLNPO has in place a quality management system that conforms to the EPA Quality Management
Order. This program has a joint Canadian-US, quality system and aworkgroup that meets twice ayear. GLNPO is
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-23
-------
Goal 6 - Reduction of Global and Cross-Border Environmental Risks (continued)
audited every 3 years in accordance with federal policy for quality management. GLNPO's quality management
system has been given "outstanding" ratings in previous peer and management reviews.
The sampling design is dominated by rural sites that under emphasize urban contributions to deposition; thus,
although the data are very useful for trends information, there is less assurance of the representativeness of
deposition to the whole lake. There are gaps in open lake water column organics data, thus limiting EPA's ability to
calculate atmospheric loadings.
Improvements: GLNPO expects to post joint data that have passed quality review to http://binational.net/, a
newly created joint international web site.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-59)
Trophic status and phosphorus concentrations in the Great Lakes. (APG 38)
Performance Database: GLNPO base monitoring program.
Data Source: Data are part of GLNPO's ongoing base monitoring program for the open waters of the five Great
Lakes. GLNPO is the principal source of the data. FY 2001 annual performance data are complete.
Data Quality: GLNPO has in place a quality management system that conforms to the EPA Quality Management
Order. GLNPO is audited every 3 years in accordance with federal policy for quality management. GLNPO's
quality management system has been given "outstanding" ratings in previous peer and management reviews. The
sampling and analytical operations in support of this program were audited in August 2001 with no significant
findings related to quality. The representativeness of GLNPO's annual monitoring data will be assessed to ascertain
the appropriate frequency for sampling various parameters.
Improvements: A streamlined data entry system that captures all field data in support of the open lake monitoring
limnology program has been developed aboard the Research Vessel Lake Guardian.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-59)
Peer-reviewed reports for decision-makers and the public on potential consequences of global change on three
regions and human health, which are the finished products of a multi-year effort. (APG 39)
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-60)
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. (APG 40)
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system. Performance data are complete and final.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-60)
Fuel efficiency of EPA-developed Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV) Concept Vehicle over
EPA Driving Cycles Tested. (APG 41)
B-24 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 6 - Reduction of Global and Cross-Border Environmental Risks (continued)
Performance Database: Fuel economy test data for both urban and highway test cycles under the EPA Federal Test
Procedure for passenger cars. Performance data are complete and final.
Data Source: EPA fuel economy tests performed at the National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory, Ann
Arbor, Michigan.
Data Quality: EPA fuel economy tests are performed in accordance with the EPA Federal Test Procedure and all
applicable quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures. EPAs National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions
Laboratory is recognized as the world state-of-the-art facility for fuel economy and emissions testing.
Primarily because of EPA regulations, vehicle fuel economy testing is a well-established and precise exercise with
extremely low test-to-test variability (well less than 5 percent). One uncertainty relates to fuel economy testing of
hybrid vehicles (those with more than one source of on-board power), which is more complex than testing of
conventional vehicles. EPA has not yet published formal regulations to cover hybrid vehicles.
Improvements: EPA is using good engineering judgment and ongoing consultations with other expert organizations
(including major auto companies through PNGV) to develop internal procedures for testing hybrid vehicles.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-60)
• Reductions from EPAs Buildings Sector Programs (ENERGY STAR). (APG 42)
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPAs Industrial Efficiency/Waste Management Programs. (APG 42)
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPAs Industrial Methane Outreach Programs. (APG 42)
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPAs Industrial HFC/PFC Programs. (APG 42)
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPAs Transportation Programs. (APG 42)
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPAs State and Local Programs. (APG 42)
Performance Database: Baseline Data on Greenhouse Gas Emissions Climate Protection Division Tracking
System. Performance data lag by approximately 9 months and are not currently available. Data will be reported in
the FY 2002 Annual Report.
Data Source: Baseline data for carbon emissions related to energy use come from the Energy Information Agency
(EIA). Baseline data for non-carbon dioxide emissions, including nitrous oxide and other global warming potential
gases, are maintained by EPA. EPA develops the methane emissions baselines and projections using information
from industrial partners, which include the natural gas, coal, and landfill gas development industries. EPA continues to
develop annual inventories as well as update methodologies as new information becomes available.
EPAs voluntary programs collect partner reports on facility-specific improvements (e.g., space upgraded, kilowatt-
hours reduced.) A carbon-conversion factor is used to convert this information to estimated greenhouse gas (GHG)
reductions. EPA maintains a "tracking system" for emissions reductions based on the reports submitted by partners.
Data Quality: EPA devotes considerable effort to obtaining the best possible information on which to evaluate
emissions reductions from voluntary programs. For example 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. The Administration regularly evaluates the effectiveness of its climate programs through interagency
evaluations. The first such interagency evaluation, chaired by the White House Council on Environmental Quality,
examined the status of the Climate Change Action Plan. The review included participants from EPA, the
Department of Energy (DOE), the Department of Commerce (DOC), the Department of Transportation (DOT),
and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The results were published in the U.S. Climate Action Report—1997
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-25
-------
Goal 6 - Reduction of Global and Cross-Border Environmental Risks (continued)
as part of the United States' submission to the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC). A 1997 audit by
EPA's Office of the Inspector General concluded that the climate programs examined "used good management
practices" and "effectively estimated the impact their activities had on reducing risks to health and the
environment...." An interagency task force is preparing the Third National Communication to describe policies and
strategies (such as ENERGY STAR and PNGV) undertaken by the United States to reduce GHG emissions, the
implementation status of the policies and strategies, and their actual and projected benefits. One result of this
interagency review process will be a refinement of future goals for these policies and strategies, which will be
communicated to the Secretariat of the FCCC in 2001 as part of the Third National Communication.
These are indirect measures of GHG emissions (carbon-conversion factors and methods to convert material-specific
reductions to GHG emissions reductions). The voluntary nature of the programs might affect reporting. Further
research will be necessary to fully understand the links between GHG concentrations and specific environmental
impacts, such as impacts on health, ecosystems, crops, weather events, and so forth.
Improvements: None.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page II-61)
Infrastructure for carbon sequestration activities developed. (APG 44)
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system. Performance data are complete and final.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page II-61)
Annual GHG inventory. (APG 45)
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-60)
Annual Energy Savings. (APG 43)
Performance Database: Climate Protection Division Tracking.
Data Source: Voluntary energy efficiency programs collect partner reports on facility-specific improvements (e.g.,
space upgraded, kilowatt-hours reduced). Performance data lag by approximately 9 months and are not currently
available. Data will be reported in the FY 2002 Annual Report.
Data Quality: EPA has a quality assurance process in place to check the validity of partner reports. The voluntary
nature of programs might affect reporting.
Peer-reviewed carbon-conversion factors are used to ensure consistency with generally accepted measures of GHG
emissions. The Administration regularly evaluates the effectiveness of its climate programs through interagency
evaluations. The first such interagency evaluation, chaired by the White House Council on Environmental Quality,
examined the status of the Climate Change Action Plan. The review included participants from EPA, DOE, DOC,
DOT, and USDA. The results were published in the US. Climate Action Report—1997 as part of the United States'
submission to the FCCC. A 1997 audit by EPA's OIG concluded that the climate programs examined "used good
management practices" and "effectively estimated the impact their activities had on reducing risks to health and the
B-26 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 6 - Reduction of Global and Cross-Border Environmental Risks (continued)
environment...." An interagency task force is preparing the Third National Communication to describe policies and
strategies (such as ENERGY STAR and PNGV) undertaken by the United States to reduce GHG emissions, the
implementation status of the policies and strategies, and their actual and projected benefits. One result of this
interagency review process will be a refinement of future goals for these policies and strategies, which will be
communicated to the Secretariat of the FCCC in 2001 as part of the Third National Communication.
Improvements: None.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-62)
Assistance to countries working under Montreal Protocol. (APG 46)
Performance Database: Database maintained by Stratospheric Protection program (SPP). Performance data are
complete and final.
Data Source: The progress of international implementation goals is measured by tracking the number of countries
receiving assistance, dollars allocated to each, and the expected reduction in ozone-depleting substances in assisted
countries. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the SPP maintain the data.
Data Quality: The SPP receives periodic reports on the financial status of participating countries from UNEP. This
information is then cross-checked with SPP records to ensure the accuracy of the performance data.
Improvements: None.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-62)
Domestic consumption of Class II hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs). (APG 47)
Performance Database: Allowance Tracking System (ATS) database maintained by SPP. Performance data lag by
approximately 6 months and are not currently available. Data will be reported in FY 2002 Annual Report.
Data Source: Progress on restricting domestic consumption of Class II HCFCs is tracked by monitoring industry
reports of compliance with EPAs phaseout regulations. Monthly information on domestic production, imports, and
exports from the International Trade Commission is maintained in the ATS.
Data Quality: Reporting and record-keeping requirements are published in 40 CFR Part 82, Subpart A, Sections
92.9 through 82.13. These sections of the Stratospheric Ozone Protection Rule specify the required data and
accompanying documentation that companies must submit or maintain on-site to demonstrate their compliance with
the regulation.
The ATS data are subject to a Quality Assurance Plan. In addition, the data are subject to an annual quality assurance
review, coordinated by Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) staff separate from those on the team normally
responsible for data collection and maintenance. The ATS is programmed to ensure consistency of the data elements
reported by companies. The tracking system flags inconsistent data for review and resolution by the tracking system
manager. This information is then cross-checked with compliance data submitted by reporting companies. The SPP
maintains a user's manual for the ATS that specifies the standard operating procedures for data entry and data
analysis. Regional inspectors perform inspections and audits on-site at the facilities of producers, importers, and
exporters. These audits verify the accuracy of compliance data submitted to EPA through examination of company
records.
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-27
-------
Goal 6 - Reduction of Global and Cross-Border Environmental Risks (continued)
Improvements: None.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-62)
Domestic exempted production and import of newly produced Class I chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and halons.
(APG 47)
Performance Database: ATS database maintained by SPP. Performance data lag by approximately 6 months and
are not currently available. Data will be reported in the FY 2002 report.
Data Source: Progress on restricting domestic exempted consumption of Class I CFCs and halon is tracked by
monitoring industry reports of compliance with EPA's phaseout regulations. Monthly information on domestic
production, imports, and exports from the International Trade Commission is maintained in the ATS.
Data Quality: Reporting and record-keeping requirements are published in 40 CFR Part 82, Subpart A, Sections
82.9 through 82.13. These sections of the Stratospheric Ozone Protection Rule specify the required data and
accompanying documentation that companies must submit or maintain on-site to demonstrate their compliance with
the regulation.
The ATS data are subject to a Quality Assurance Plan. In addition the data are subject to an annual quality assurance
review, coordinated by OAR staff separate from those on the team normally responsible for data collection and
maintenance. The ATS is programmed to ensure consistency of the data elements reported by companies. The
tracking system flags inconsistent data for review and resolution by the tracking system manager. This information is
then cross-checked with compliance data submitted by reporting companies. The SPP maintains a user's manual for
the ATS that specifies the standard operating procedures for data entry and data analysis. Regional inspectors
perform inspections and audits on-site at the facilities of producers, importers, and exporters. These audits verify the
accuracy of compliance data submitted to EPA through examination of company records.
Improvements: None.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-62)
Increase the number of children participating in the SunWise School Program by 25 percent. (APG 48)
Performance Database: The SunWise School Program Tracking System tracks multiple variables about
participating schools, including student participation rates. Performance data are complete and final.
Data Source: Data on number of participating students are provided by an educator, e.g., classroom teacher or
school nurse.
Data Quality: Participating educators are asked to evaluate the program at the end of the school year and provide
information on the number of students who received SunWise teaching. These numbers are cross-checked against
the numbers in the tracking system.
EPA's Internet Support Team in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, developed the SunWise Tracking System
database in accordance with their standard Quality Assurance Plan.
SunWise is a voluntary program. Educators register to join by completing a paper or electronic registration form.
The paper registration form requests that educators submit a separate registration form for each participating class.
In some instances an educator might not complete a registration form for each class, resulting in an under reporting
B-28 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 6 - Reduction of Global and Cross-Border Environmental Risks (continued)
of student participation. The evaluation form educators are asked to complete at the end of the school year requests
information on the number of participating students, and this information is cross-checked against the data from the
tracking system. Because return of the evaluation form is not mandatory, the ability to cross-check the information
is limited by the response rate. Because of these limitations, Sun Wise provides an actual number of participating
schools and a conservative estimate of the number of participating students. The estimate is based on experience that
at least 2 classes per school, with 25 students per class, participate.
Improvements: Sun Wise is workingwith Boston University Medical School to develop an enhanced system
whereby all schools are called on to report their participation rates.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-63)
• Number of countries or localities (3) that have adopted new or strengthened environmental laws and policies.
(APG 49)
• Number of organizations (3) that have increased environmental planning, analysis, and enforcement capabilities.
(APG 49)
• Number of organizations (3) that have increased capabilities to generate and analyze environmental data and
other information. (APG 49)
• Number of organizations (3) that have increased public outreach and participation. (APG 49)
• Number of targeted sectors (3) that have adopted cleaner production practices. (APG 49)
• Number of cities (3) that have reduced mobile-source based ambient air pollution concentrations. (APG 49)
Performance Database: Performance measures are outputs with no internal tracking systems. Data are collected
manually. FY 2001 annual performance data are complete.
Data Source: Project-specific.
Data Quality: Performance measurement requires objective assessment of tasks completed. Data on the
performance of specific urban projects are compiled and recorded by the grantee after consulting bimonthly with
local, regional, and national urban environmental practitioners. The data are forwarded to and verified (in writing) by
the EPA project officer.
Improvements: Performance measures and databases were improved in FY 2001 to measure in-country indicators
(new laws, planning capabilities, and activities) rather than program outputs, such as conferences and training
developed and given by EPA. Activities in support of these projects might result in new or improved data collection
systems in developing countries. Under its cooperative programs with the U.S. Agency for International Development
(USAID) in Central America, EPA is developing a set of indicators to measure progress for each activity undertaken.
These indicators should be in place in FY 2002.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
Goal 7 - Expansion of Americans' Right to Know AboutTheir Environment
Appendix B describes the quality of the data used to measure EPAs performance. For each of the 10 EPA Strategic
Goals, this appendix describes (1) the performance measures (PMs), (2) the database(s) supporting the PMs, (3) the
source of the database(s), (4) the quality of the data, (5) planned improvements to the data or database(s), and (6) any
material inadequacies.
www.epa.gov/ocfo B-29
-------
Goal 7 - Expansion of Americans' Right to Know AboutTheir Environment
(continued)
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-69)
By the end of FY 2001, all 10 EPA Regions will have an enforcement and compliance web site. (APG 50)
Performance Database: Output measure; no database.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-69)
EPA will make 90 percent of enforcement and compliance policies and guidance issued in FY 2001 available on the
Internet within 30 days. (APG 50)
Performance Database: Output measure; internal tracking system.
Data Source: Manual system. Headquarters tracks date document was issued and up loaded to the Internet. FY
2001 performance data are complete.
Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-69)
By April 20,2001, make summaries of all FY 2000 significant cases available on the Internet. (APG 50)
Performance Database: Output measure; no database.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-69)
Award 90 grants to organizations which address environmental problems in communities primarily of low income
and minority populations. (APG 51)
Performance Database: Each region awards the grants from funds transferred from the Office of Environmental
Justice (OEJ). Upon completion of each year's cycle, the regions submit their award selections to OEJ, from which a
master list is compiled. OEJ maintains the annual lists. FY 2001 performance data are complete.
Data Source: The OEJ compiles lists of annual grant awards, based on information submitted by the regions.
Data Quality: Prior to award each grant application is reviewed in accordance with EPA quality management
protocols in each region. Because these grants are for a maximum of $20,000 and do not involve data collection or
manipulation, few are required to have Quality Management Plans associated with them.
Improvements: None.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-69)
Respond within 60 days to 75 percent of requests made to each region and National Program Manager to address
complaints heard duringpublic commentperiod at National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC).
(APG 51)
Performance Database: None.
B-30 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 7 - Expansion of Americans' Right to Know AboutTheir Environment
(continued)
Data Source: Comments made at the NEJAC meetings during the public comment period; transmittal letters are
sent to regions for direct response to complainants.
Data Quality: This performance measure is not meaningful and will not be continued into 2003.
Improvements: None. This measure will not continue into 2003.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure. However, information
provided by this measure is not meaningful because it is tracking issuance of a form letter rather than substantive
response to an issue. The letters are computer-generated and are sent for every comment rather than for comments
relevant to an environmental issue under EPA's jurisdiction.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-69)
Conduct 18 NEJAC meetings and focused roundtables in local communities where problems have been identified.
(APG 51)
Performance Database, Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-69)
Hold 25 EPA-sponsored public meeting where disproportionately impacted and disadvantaged communities
participate. (APG 51)
Performance Database, Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-69)
Increase the number of demonstration projects established under the Federal Interagency Working Group on
Environmental Justice. (APG 51)
Performance Database: None. The 15 projects are maintained in a text file in the OEJ. FY 2001 performance data
are complete.
Data Source: The 15 identified demonstration projects are tracked by the sponsoring agency. No new projects were
added in 2001.
Data Quality: Data are simple frequencies, checked informally for accuracy.
Improvements: EPA plans to develop a tracking system and publish it on the Internet.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-70)
TRI Public Release. (APG 52)
Performance Database Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-70)
Chemical submissions and revisions processed. (APG 52)
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-31
-------
Goal 7 - Expansion of Americans' Right to Know AboutTheir Environment
(continued)
Performance Database: Toxic Release Inventory System (THIS). FY 2001 performance data are complete.
http://wwwepa.gov/enviro/html/toxic_releases.html
Data Source: TRI chemical reports provided by reporting facilities.
Data Quality: Data are simple frequencies, checked informally for accuracy.
Improvements: None.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-70)
Toxic Release Inventory System (TRIS) database complete and report issued. (APG 52)
Performance Database: Output measure; no database.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-71)
The Agency's Risk Assessment Forum will develop technical issue papers and develop a framework for preparing
cumulative risk assessments. (APG 53)
Performance Database: Output measure; no database.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-71)
The Agency's Risk Assessment Forum will develop guidance on determining management objectives and selecting
assessment endpoints for ecological risk assessment. (APG 53)
Performance Database: Output measure; no database.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
Goal 8 - Sound Science, Improved Understanding of Environmental Risk, and
Greater Innovation to Address Environmental Problems
Appendix B describes the quality of the data used to measure EPA's performance. For each of the 10 EPA Strategic
Goals, this appendix describes (1) the performance measures (PMs), (2) the database(s) supporting the PMs, (3) the
source of the database(s), (4) the quality of the data, (5) planned improvements to the data or database(s), and (6) any
material inadequacies.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-79)
Report describing the conditions of the Nation's estuaries. (APG 54)
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
B-32 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 8 - Sound Science, Improved Understanding of Environmental Risk, and
Greater Innovation to Address Environmental Problems (continued)
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-80)
Deliver a report to Congress on the status and effectiveness of the Environmental Technology Verification (ETV)
Program during its first five years. (APG 55)
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-80)
High impact changes. (APG 56)
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
Goal 9 -A Credible Deterrent to Pollution and Greater Compliance with the Law
Appendix B describes the quality of the data used to measure EPAs performance. For each of the 10 EPA Strategic
Goals, this appendix describes (1) the performance measures (PMs), (2) the database(s) supporting the PMs, (3) the
source of the database(s), (4) the quality of the data, (5) planned improvements to the data or database(s), and (6) any
material inadequacies.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart pages 11-88,11-91)
• 75 percent of concluded enforcement actions identify pollutant reductions and/or changes in facility
management or information practices. (APG 57)
• Million pounds of pollutants reduced. (APG 57)
• Increase by 2 percent the number of concluded enforcement actions that would have the intended result of
pollutant reductions through process changes or handling of pollutants, or result in improvements in facility
management and information management practices from FY 2000. (Performance measure will be dropped in
FY 2002.) (APG 57)
• Complete settlements with 500 facilities to voluntarily self-disclose to the Federal government and correct
violations. (APG 62)
Performance Database: DOCKET. DOCKET tracks EPA civil, judicial, and enforcement actions, as well as
information on the results and environmental benefits or concluded enforcement cases and information on self-
disclosing policies. Performance data are preliminarily complete.
Data Source: The data for DOCKET are generated through the use of the Case Conclusion Data Sheet (CCDS),
which Agency staff prepare after the conclusion of each criminal and civil (judicial and administrative) enforcement
action. There are established procedures for the staff to calculate, by statute (e.g., Clean Water Act), the pollutant
reductions or eliminations. The procedure first entails the staff's determining the difference between the current "out
of compliance" concentration of the pollutant(s) and the post-enforcement action "in compliance" concentration.
This difference is then converted to mass per time using the flow or quantity information derived during the case.
Additionally CCDS captures the relevant information on the results and environmental benefits of the concluded
enforcement cases. Headquarters records information on the self-disclosing policies in DOCKET.
Data Quality: Procedures are in place for both the CCDS and for DOCKET entry. Separate CCDS Calculation
and Completion Checklists are required to be filled out at the time the CCDS is completed. Information contained
in the CCDS and DOCKET is reviewed by regional and headquarters staff for completeness and accuracy.
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-33
-------
Goal 9 -A Credible Deterrent to Pollution and Greater Compliance with the Law
(continued)
Improvements: In November 2000 EPA completed and issued to headquarters and regional managers and staff a
comprehensive guidance package on the preparation of the CCDS. This guidance is available in both print and
CD-ROM. Both versions contain work examples to ensure better calculation of the amounts of pollutants reduced
or eliminated through concluded enforcement actions. EPA is also planning to host CCDS training in each of its
10 regional offices during FY 2002. DOCKET has been modified to collect information on self-disclosing policies,
which have been tracked in DOCKET since beginning in FY 2000.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-88)
Increase or maintain existing compliance rates or other indicators of compliance for populations with established
baselines, or develop additional rates for newly selected populations. (APG 57)
Performance Database: Permit Compliance System (PCS). PCS tracks National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit and enforcement actions, as well as reporting and scheduling requirements. The AIRS
Facility Subsystem (AFS) captures emission, compliance, and permit data for major stationary sources of air
pollution. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information System (RCRAInfo) supports permit,
compliance, and corrective action activities carried out by hazardous waste handlers. Performance data are
preliminarily complete. Air data will be available at the end of January 2002.
Data Source: EPA regional offices, delegated states.
Data Quality: All of the systems have been developed in accordance with the Office of Information Management's
life cycle management guidance, which includes data validation processes, internal screen audit checks and verification,
system and user documents, data quality audit reports, third-party testing reports, and detailed report specifications
for showing how data are calculated.
Regarding AFS, EPAs Office of the Inspector General (OIG) reports in 1997 and 1998 highlighted states' problems
with identifying and reporting significant violators of the Clean Air Act, impairing EPAs ability to assess
noncompliance. EPA issued High Priority Violator Guidance to improve tracking of sources of violations. As a
result of the reports, EPA has enhanced oversight and headquarters' outreach to regions, states, and local areas. (See
Section III - Management Accomplishments and Challenges.)
Improvements: PCS modernization is under way. EPA is preparing Quality Management Plans (QMPs) (data quality
objectives, quality assurance project plans, baseline assessments) for all major systems. A new Integrated Compliance
Information System (ICIS) will support core program needs and consolidate and streamline existing systems. A pilot
project to develop statistically valid compliance rates for selected universes of regulated facilities is under way. Also, a
National Congressional Performance Measure Strategy project on the impact of EPA strategies on recidivism focuses
attention on better compliance assurance targeting, i.e., monitoring, compliance assistance, incentives, and enforcement.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-88)
• Reduce by 2 percentage points overall the level of significant noncompliance recidivism among the Clean Air
Act, Clean Water Act, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act programs from FY 2000 levels. (APG 57)
• Increase by 2 percentage points over FY 2000 levels the proportion of significant noncomplier facilities under
the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act which returned to full
physical compliance in less than two years. (APG 57)
B-34 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 9 -A Credible Deterrent to Pollution and Greater Compliance with the Law
(continued)
Performance Databases: PCS tracks NPDES permit and enforcement actions, as well as reporting and scheduling
requirements. AFS captures emission, compliance, and permit data for major stationary sources of air pollution.
RCRAInfo supports permit, compliance, and corrective action activities carried out by hazardous waste handlers.
Performance data are preliminarily complete. Air data will be available at the end of January 2002.
Data Source: EPA regional offices, and delegated states.
Data Quality: All the systems have been developed in accordance with the Office of Information Management's
life cycle management guidance, which includes data validation processes, internal screen audit checks and verification,
system and user documents, data quality audit reports, third-party testing reports, and detailed report specifications
for showing how data are calculated.
Regarding AFS, EPAs OIG reports in 1997 and 1998 highlighted states' problems with identifying and reporting
significant violators of the Clean Air Act, impairing EPAs ability to assess noncompliance. EPA issued High Priority
Violator Guidance to improve tracking of sources of violations. As a result of the reports, EPA has enhanced
oversight and headquarters' outreach to regions, states, and local areas. (See Section III - Management
Accomplishments and Challenges.)
Improvements: PCS modernization is underway. EPA is preparing QMPs (data quality objectives, quality assurance
project plans, baseline assessments) for all major systems. A new system, I CIS, will support core program needs and
consolidate and streamline existing systems. A pilot project to develop statistically valid compliance rates for selected
universes of regulated facilities is underway. Also, a National Congressional Performance Measure Strategy project
on the impact of EPA strategies on recidivism focuses attention on better compliance assurance targeting, i.e.,
monitoring, compliance assistance, incentives, and enforcement.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart pages 11-88,11-90)
• Produce a report on the number of civil and criminal enforcement actions initiated and concluded. (APG 57)
• Complete Quality Management Plan (QMP) project for additional data systems. (APG 60)
• Field test Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) Phase I, retire DOCKET system and complete
design and development of ICIS phase II. (APG 60)
• Continue operation and maintenance/user support of 14 information systems housing national enforcement
and compliance assurance data with a minimum of 95 percent operational efficiency. (APG 60)
Performance Database: Output measures; internal tracking. Performance outputs are complete.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-89)
• Number of EPA inspections conducted. (APG 58)
• Number of criminal investigations. (APG 58)
• Number of civil investigations. (APG 58)
Performance Databases: Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA). IDEA integrates data from major
enforcement and compliance systems, such as PCS, AFS, RCRAInfo, and the Emergency Response Notification
System (ERNS). Performance data are preliminarily complete. Air data will be available at the end of January 2002.
Data Source: EPA regional offices.
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-35
-------
Goal 9 -A Credible Deterrent to Pollution and Greater Compliance with the Law
(continued)
Data Quality: All the systems have been developed in accordance with the Office of Information Management's
life cycle management guidance, which includes data validation processes, internal screen audit checks and verification,
system and user documents, data quality audit reports, third-party testing reports, and detailed report specifications
for showing how data are calculated.
Regarding AFS, EPA's OIG reports in 1997 and 1998 highlighted states' problems with identifying and reporting
significant violators of the Clean Air Act, impairing EPA's ability to assess noncompliance. EPA issued High Priority
Violator Guidance to improve tracking of sources of violations. As a result of the reports, EPA has enhanced
oversight and headquarters' outreach to regions, states, and local areas. (See Section III - Management
Accomplishments and Challenges.)
Improvements: PCS modernization is underway. EPA is preparing QMPs (data quality objectives, quality assurance
project plans, baseline assessments) for all major systems. A new system, ICIS will support core program needs and
consolidate and streamline existing systems. A pilot project on developing statistically valid compliance rates is under
way.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-90)
Begin the development and system testing of a modernized Permit Compliance System (PCS). (APG 60)
Performance Database: No database; internal tracking of measure. Performance output is complete.
Data Source: Not applicable.
Data Quality: Contained within the project design.
Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-90)
Conduct EPA-assisted inspections to build capacity. (APG 59)
Performance Database: Output measure; internal regional tracking system. Performance output is complete.
Data Source: Internal Regional tracking system.
Data Quality: Regional and HQ managers check information to confirm accuracy.
Improvements: None.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-90)
• Number of EPA training classes/seminars delivered to states, localities and tribes to build capacity. (APG 59)
• Total number of state, tribal and local students trained. (APG 59)
Performance Database: National Enforcement Training Institute's (NETI's) course information management
systems, the Automated Blue Form, and the registrar. Performance data are complete.
Data Source: Manual Reports.
Data Quality: Managers ensure quality assurance/quality control of information in system.
B-36 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 9 -A Credible Deterrent to Pollution and Greater Compliance with the Law
(continued)
Improvements: None.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-91)
Review and respond to 100 percent of the notices for transboundary movement of hazardous wastes, ensuring their
proper management in accordance with international agreements. (APG 61)
Performance Database: Waste Import Tracking System (WITS), Hazardous Waste Export System (HWES).
Performance data are complete.
Data Source: Manual reports (notifications) submitted by U.S. exporters and by foreign governments for imports.
Data Quality: EPA reviews the notifications, manifests, and annual reports to ensure they are timely and accurate
before they are entered into the database.
Improvements: None.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-90)
• The National Enforcement Training Institute (NET!) will train tribal personnel. (APG 59)
• The National Enforcement Training Institute (NETI) will provide tribal governments with 50 computer-based
training (CBT) modules. (APG 59)
Performance Database: National Enforcement Training Institute Registration System. Performance data are
complete.
Data Source:. Qualified individuals interested in NETI training.
Data Quality, Improvements: None.
Material Inadequacy: There are no material inadequacies for any of these performance measures.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-90)
Conduct four analyses of environmental problems in Indian Country using EPAs On-line Tracking Information
System (OTIS). (APG 60)
Performance Database: OTIS. OTIS integrates data from major enforcement and compliance systems, such as
PCS, AFS, RCRAInfo, and ERNS. Performance data are complete.
Data Source: EPA regional offices.
Data Quality: All the systems have been developed in accordance with the Office of Information Management's
life cycle management guidance, which includes data validation processes, internal screen audit checks and verification,
system and user documents, data quality audit reports, third-party testing reports, and detailed report specifications
for showing how data are calculated.
Improvements: Not applicable.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-37
-------
Goal 9 -A Credible Deterrent to Pollution and Greater Compliance with the Law
(continued)
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-91)
Increase Environmental Management Systems (EMS) use by developing tools, such as training and best practice
manuals that encourage improved environmental performance. (APG 63)
Performance Database: Internal tracking system is currently being developed. Performance output is complete.
Data Source: Headquarters will report on progress.
Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
Goal 10 - Effective Management
Appendix B describes the quality of the data used to measure EPA's performance. For each of the 10 EPA Strategic
Goals, this appendix describes (1) the performance measures (PMs), (2) the database(s) supporting the PMs, (3) the
source of the database(s), (4) the quality of the data, (5) planned improvements to the data or database(s), and (6) any
material inadequacies.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-100)
Percentage of outcome-oriented APGs/PMs (Annual Performance Goals/Performance Measures) in Agency's
FY 2002 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification submission. (APG 66)
Performance Database: Performance and Environmental Results System (PERS) and Budget Automation System
(BAS) are used for internal tracking. The performance data are complete for assessment of FY 2001 performance.
Data Source: PERS, BAS, and Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) staff evaluation.
Data Quality: 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. However, internal
staff evaluation allows the Agency to develop trend data and analyze information submitted to these centralized
databases.
Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-99)
Agency's audited Financial Statements and Annual Report are submitted on time. (APG 65)
Performance Database: Output measure; no database for tracking timeliness.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-99)
EPA's audited Financial Statements receive an unqualified opinion and provide information that is useful and relevant
to the Agency and external parties. (APG 65)
Performance Database: Output measure; no database for tracking unqualified opinions and information that is
useful and relevant.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
B-38 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 10 - Effective Management (continued)
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-101)
Number of IG [Inspector General] recommendations/advice or actions taken to improve efficiency and
effectiveness of business practices and environmental programs. (APG 70)
Performance Database: The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) Performance Results and Measurement
System (PRMS). PRMS is used to capture and aggregate information on the actual and prospective results of
Agency products and services. Database measures include numbers of: (1) recommendations for environmental
improvement; (2) legislative and regulatory changes; (3) policy, directive, or process changes; (4) environmental risks
identified, reduced or eliminated; (5) best practices identified and transferred; and (6) examples of environmental
improvement. The performance data are complete for assessment of FY2001 performance.
Data Source: Designated OIG staff are responsible for entering data into the system. Data are from OIG
independent follow-up, research, and certifications of actions taken by EPA officials. OIG also collects independent
data from EPAs partners and through its own performance evaluations, audits, and research to determine the extent
of environmental improvements, risks reduced or avoided, and best practices transferred.
Data Quality: All performance data submitted to the database require a verifiable source ensuring data accuracy
and reliability. Data quality assurance and control of reported results, qualified by common application of new
measurement definitions, are subject to rigorous compliance with the Government Auditing Standards of the
Comptroller General, review by OIG management, and independent OIG Management Assessment Review Teams.
The statutory mission of the OIG is to conduct independent audits, evaluations, and investigations to promote,
among other things, integrity in Agency operations and reporting systems.
Improvements: The OIG developed PRMS as a prototype in FY 2001 and anticipates enhancing it in FY 2003 with
more sophisticated software designed to improve data collection, retention, and analysis. With enhanced linkages to
customer satisfaction results and resource investments, it will provide a full, balanced scorecard with return on
investment information for accountability and decision-making
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-100)
Percentage of the new Research Triangle Park building construction completed. (APG 68)
Performance Database: No relevant database used to track this performance measure.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-100)
Percentage of Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) building construction completed. (APG 68)
Performance Database: No relevant database used to track this performance measure.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-101)
Percentage of fuel cell components in place. (APG 69)
Performance Database: No relevant database used to track this performance measure.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-39
-------
Goal 10 - Effective Management (continued)
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-100)
Percentage of EPA personnel consolidated into headquarters complex. (APG 67)
Performance Database: Program output measure; no internal tracking system.
Data Source, Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-99)
Evaluate the effectiveness of the Children's Health Valuation Handbook. (APG 64)
Performance Database: Not applicable.
Data Source: A private contractor completed the evaluation of the Children's Health Valuation Handbook on
September 29, 2001.
Data Quality, Improvements, Material Inadequacy: Not applicable.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-101)
Overall customer and stakeholder satisfaction with audit products and services (timeliness, relevancy, usefulness and
responsiveness). (APG 70)
Performance Database: Performance data are maintained in the PRMS. The performance data are complete for
assessment of FY2001 performance.
Data Source: The OIG regularly collects information on customer satisfaction and results on audit products and
services from direct surveys to external customers and stakeholders. Survey results are accumulated, maintained, and
tallied in the OIG PRMS.
Data Quality: Survey results come from respondents and are entered into the OIG PRMS. Confirmation with
respondents is conducted selectively.
Improvements: No improvements to this data collection are planned, except to begin using the Internet for wider
distribution of surveys.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: (Refer to Performance Data Chart page 11-101)
Potential monetary value of recommendations, questioned costs, savings and recoveries. (APG 70)
Performance Database: Performance data are maintained and aggregated in the Inspector General Operations and
Reporting System and the new OIG PRMS. The performance data are complete for assessment of FY 2001
performance.
Data Source: The potential monetary value of recommendations is the direct result of audits and evaluations
performed in strict compliance with the Generally Accepted Auditing Standard of the United States Comptroller
General. The OIG identifies the amounts of ineligible, unsupported, and unnecessary/unreasonable costs based on
professional auditing standards and applicable laws and regulations relative to the scope and type of audit.
B-40 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
Goal 10 - Effective Management (continued)
Data Quality: Data are collected from audits and evaluations performed in accordance with professional standards
and are subject to both internal and external independent review.
Improvements: The OIG is working to improve the consistency in data reporting in the new PRMS, which is
designed to integrate performance, customer satisfaction, and cost data into a balanced scorecard.
Material Inadequacy: There is no material inadequacy for this performance measure.
tvtvw.epa.gov/ocfo B-41
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
B-42 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
A p' pS'Jld J : ,
EPA Organisation Chart
-------
APPENDIX C:
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Environmental
Appeals Board
Regional
Operations
Children's Health
Protection
Executive Support
Administrative
Law Judges
Cooperative
Environmental
Management
Small and
Disadvataged
Business Utilization
Science Advisory
Board Staff Office
Executive
Secretariat
Assistant Administrator
for Administration and
Resources Management
General Counsel
Assistant Administrator
for Prevention,
Pesticides, and Toxic
Substances
Region 1
Boston, MA
Region 5
Chicago, IL
Administrator
Deputy Administrator
Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation
Inspector General
Assistant Administrator
for Research and
Development
Region 2
New York, NY
Region 6
Dallas, TX
Region 9
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
Assistant Administrator
for International
Activities
Assistant Administrator
for Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Region 3
Philadelphia, PA
Region 7
Kansas City, KS
Region 10
Seattle, WA
Chief Financial Officer
Assistant Administrator
for Environmental
Information
Assistant Administrator
for Water
Region 4
Atlanta, GA
Region 8
Denver, CO
www. epa.gov/ocfo
C-l
-------
£.r.iil±£ _D
Acronyms and Abbreviations
-------
APPENDIX D:
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AFS AIRS Facility Subsystem
AIRS Aerometric Information Retrieval
System
ANA American Nurses Association
APG Annual Performance Goal
AQCD Air Quality Criteria Document
AQI Air Quality Index
ASPEN Assessment System for Population
Exposure Nationwide
ATS Allowance Tracking System
BAS Budget Automation System
BEACH Beach Environmental Assessment
and Coastal Health
BECC Border Environment Cooperative
Commission
BMS Brownfields Management System
CAA Clean Air Act
CAFO Concentrated Animal Feeding
Operation
CAS Center of Applied Science
CASAC Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
CBT computer-based training
CCDS Case Conclusion Data Sheet
CDC Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
CDX Central Data Exchange
GEMS Continuous Emission Monitoring
System
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act
CERCLIS Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Information System
CFC chlorofluorocarbon
CIO Chief Information Officer
CJ Congressional Justification
CO carbon monoxide
CSO combined sewer overflow
CTAG Certification & Training Assessment
Group
CWA Clean Water Act
CWSRF Clean Water State Revolving Fund
DI Direct Implementation
DOC Department of Commerce
DOE Department of Energy
DOJ Department of Justice
DOT Department of Transportation
DQO data quality objective
DRAP Data Reliability Action Plan
DWSRF Drinking Water State Revolving Load
Fund
EGOS Environmental Council of the States
EDSC Environmental Data Standards Council
EEO Equal Employment Opportunity
EFAB Environmental Financial Advisory
Board
EFC Environmental Finance Center
EFIN Environmental Financing Information
Network
EIA Energy Information Agency
EIMS Environmental Information
Management System
www. epa.gov/ocfo
D-l
-------
EMAP Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment Program
EMD Emissions, Monitoring, and Analysis
Division [of OAQPS]
EMS Environmental Management System
EPCRA Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act
ERNS Emergency Response Notification
System
ERP Environmental Results Program
ETS Emissions Tracking System
ETV Environmental Technology
Verification
FCCC Framework Convention on Climate
Change
FDA Food and Drug Administration
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act
FMFIA Federal Managers Financial Integrity
Act
FQPA Food Quality Protection Act
FREDS Findings and Required Elements Data
System
FRS Facility Registry System
GAO General Accounting Office
GAP General Assistance Program
GHG greenhouse gas
GIS geographic information system
GLENDA Great Lakes Environmental Database
GLNPO Great Lakes National Program Office
GPRA Government Performance
and Results Act
HCFC hydrochlorofluorocarbon
HPV Health Protection Value
HPV High Production Volume
hr hour
HUC hydrologic unit code
HWES Hazardous Waste Export System
HWIR Hazardous Waste Identification Rule
IADN Integrated Atmospheric Deposition
Network
IAQ indoor air quality
ICC Interstate Commerce Commission
ICIS Integrated Compliance Information
System
IDEA Integrated Data for Enforcement
Analysis
IDEF Interim Data Exchange Format
IECP Integrated Error Correction Process
IG Inspector General
IPM integrated pest management
IRIS Integrated Risk Information System
IRM Information Resources Management
ISAC Information Sharing and Analysis
Center
IT information technology
ITC Inter-Tribal Council
LEPC Local Emergency Planning Committee
LUST leaking underground storage tank
MA DEP Massachussetts Department of
Environmental Protection
MACT Maximum Achievable Control
Technology
MCL maximum contaminant level
MMTCE million metric tons carbon equivalent
MTBE methyl tertiary butyl ether
MYP multiyear plan
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality
Standards
NADBank North American Development Bank
D-2
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
NADP National Atmospheric Deposition
Program
NAPAP National Acid Precipitation
Assessment Program
NAS National Academy of Sciences
NATA National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment
NCA National Coastal Assessment
NEJAC National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council
NEP National Estuary Program
NEPPS National Environmental Performance
Partnership System
NET National Emissions Trends
NETI National Enforcement Training
Institute
NHEXAS National Human Exposure
Assessment Survey
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
NOI Notice of Intent
NO nitrogen oxide
x o
NPAP National Performance Audit Program
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System
NPL National Priorities List
NTI National Toxic Inventory
O3 ozone
OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards
OAR Office of Air and Radiation
OCFO Office of the Chief Financial Officer
OCR Office of Civil Rights
ODP-MT ozone depletion potential-weighted
metric tonnes
ODS ozone-depleting substance
OECD Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development
OEI Office of Environmental Information
OEJ Office of Environmental Justice
OIG Office of the Inspector General
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OP organophosphate
OPEI Office of Policy, Economics and
Innovation
OPP Office of Pesticide Programs
OPPIN Office of Pesticide Programs
Information Network
ORD Office of Research and Development
OTIS On-line Tracking Information System
OW Office of Water
Pb lead
PBT persistent, bioaccumulative toxic
PCB polychlorinated biphenyl
PCS Permit Compliance System
FDD Presidential Decision Directive
PERS Performance and Environmental
Results System
PM particulate matter
PM-2.5 particulate matter 2.5 micrometers or
less in diameter
PM-10 particulate matter 10 micrometers or
less in diameter
PMFP Public Management and Finance
Program
PNGV Partnership for a New Generation
of Vehicles
POP persistent organic pollutant
POTW publicly owned treatment works
PPG performance partnership grant
ppm parts per million
www. epa.gov/ocfo
D-3
-------
PRATS Pesticide Regulatory Action Tracking
System
PRP Potentially Responsible Party
PWSS Public Water System Supervision
QA/QC quality assurance/quality control
QMP Quality Management Plan
R/V Research Vessel
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act
RCRAInfo Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act Information System
RCRIS Resource Conservation and Recovery
Information System
RED Reregistration Eligibility Decision
REI Reinventing Environmental
Information
RfD reference dose
RFG reformulated gasoline
RPO Regional Planning Organization
RS&T Regional Science & Technology
SAB Science Advisory Board
SAR Structure-Activity Relationship
SAV submerged aquatic vegetation
SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Information
System
SectorSTAR Sector Strategies, Tools, and Resources
SES Senior Executive Service
SGP Strategic Goals Program
SIC Standard Industrial Classification
SIP State Implementation Plan
SITE Superfund Innovative Technology
Evaluation
SIU significant industrial user
SLAMS State and Local Air Monitoring
Stations
SO2 sulfur dioxide
SOL statute of limitations
SO sulfur oxides
X
SPP Stratospheric Protection Program
STAR Science to Achieve Results
SW storm water
TBA Targeted Brownfields Assessment
TBT tnbutyltin
TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load
TORTS Tolerance Reassessment Tracking
System
TRI Toxics Release Inventory
TRIS Toxic Release Inventory System
TSC Tribal Science Council
TSCA Toxic Substance Control Act
UNEP United Nations Environment
Programme
USAID United States Agency for International
Development
USDA United States Department of
Agriculture
USGCRP United States Global Change Research
Program
UST underground storage tank
UV ultraviolet
VMT vehicle miles traveled
VOC volatile organic compound
VPN virtual private network
WATERS Watershed Assessment, Tracking &
Environmental Results
WITS Waste Import Tracking System
WQS water quality standard
XL excellence and Leadership
D-4
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
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.
EPA Newsroom
Headlines, Press Releases, Speeches & Testimony, Op-Eds, News Around the
Nation, Activities Update-Announcements
Browse EPA Topics Air, Cleanup, Compliance & Enforcement, Economics, Ecosystems, Emergencies,
Environmental Management, Human Health, Industry, International Cooperation,
Pesticides, Pollutants/Toxics, Pollution Prevention, Research, Treatment &
Control, Wastes, Water
Laws & Regulations Major Environmental Laws, Current Legislation in Congress, U.S. Code,
Regulations & Proposed Rules, Code of Federal Regulations, Non-Binding
Guidance Documents
Where You Live
Information Sources
Educational
Resources
About EPA
Programs
Business
Opportunities
Jobs
Recursos en
Espanol
For Kids
Search Your Community, EPA Regional Offices, State Environmental Agencies,
Learn More About Your Community
Libraries & Information Centers, Hotlines, Clearinghouses, Dockets, Employee
Directory, Publications, Newsletters & Listservs, FOIA Office, Databases &
Software, Test Methods & Models, Frequently Asked Questions
Kids, Students, Teachers, Office of Environmental Education, Researchers
Our Mission, Jobs, Who We Are, What We Do, Organization, Budget &
Performance, Contracting Opportunities, Grants & Environmental Funding,
Our History, EPA Regional Offices
Programs by Media & Topic; General Interest; Regional Offices; Research;
Programs with a Geographic Focus; State, Local, and Tribal; Innovation
Activities; Industry Partnerships; Offices & Organization Chart
Business & Industry; Contracts & RFPs; Small Business Gateway; Small Business
Opportunities; Grants & Environmental Financing; State, Local, and Tribal
EZ-Hire
Vida Diaria, Vida Profesional, Protegiendo a los Ninos, Emergencias en el Medio
Ambiente, Otros Recursos en Espanol, Leyes y Tratados en Espanol
Explorer's Club
www. epa.gov/ocfo
-------
WE WELCOME YOUR COMMENTS!
Thank you for your interest in the Environmental Protection Agency's FY 2001 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 2001AR.OCFO@epa.gov or write to:
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Office of Planning, Analysis, and Accountability (2721A)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20460
ORDERING INFORMATION
This report is available on OCFO's homepage at: http://www.epa.gov/ocfopage,
through EPA's National Service Center for Environmental Publications at 1-800-490-9198,
or by ordering online at: http://www.epa.gov/ncepihorn.
Cover Photo/Section Dividers
Suwannee Canal, Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge
David E. Alexander, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance, Air Enforcement Division
EPA-190-R-02-001
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Fiscal Year 2001 Annual Report
February 27, 2002
------- |