REGION 6
STRATEGIC PLAN
2004-2008
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
as ofJanuary 21,2004
Travel Edition
CO
o
o
o
-------
VISION
'' Working with communities, industry, and government
for a cleaner and healthier environment for the people
of the south-central United States. "
Richard E. Greene
Regional Administrator
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Executive Summary
Region 6 Environmental Challenges 1
SECTION I - Partnerships 5
State of Texas TX
State of Arkansas AR
State of Louisiana LA
State of New Mexico NM
State of Oklahoma OK
Strategic Partnership - Tribes Tribes
Region 6 Partnership Statement Statement
SECTION II - Projected Resources
FY2004 Projected Resources 6
SECTION HI - Strategies
Goal 1 - Clean Air and Global Climate Change
Objective 1: Healthier Outdoor Air
1.1.1 More People Breathing Cleaner Air 10
1.1.2 Reduced Risk from Toxic Air Pollutants 14
Objective 2: Healthier Indoor Air 18
Objective 4: Radiation
1.4.1 Enhance Radiation Protection 22
1.4.2 Maintain Emergency Response Readiness 26
Objective 5: Reduce Greenhouse Gas Intensity 30
-------
Goal 2 - Clean and Safe Water
Objective 1 : Protect Human Health
2.1.1 Water Safe to Drink
[[[ 34
Objective 2 : Protect Water Quality
2.2.1 Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
2.2.2
e ass
Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters . . . . '.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'. ............................ 3S
Goal 3 -Land Preservation and Restoration
Obj ective 1 : Preserve Land
3.1.1 Reduce Waste Generation and Increase Recycling
Manage Hazardous Wastes and Petroleum Pacts' Property' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
3-1.2 Manage H«arfn~. «/^". ._ J1"Crea?e *Wi?8 46
Objective 2: Restore Land
•r and Respond to Accidental and Intentional Releases 56
and Reuse Contaminated Land ™
Potentially Responsible Party Participation a't Superfund Site'.'.'.'.'.'.'.".'.'.'.'.'.'.'.' 66
Goal 4-Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
Objective 1: Chemical, Organism and Pesticide Risks
41 * £l"Ce Exposure to T°x* Pesticides .„
4 i i «^UCe Chemlcal a"d Biological Risks .... ^
4.1.4 Reduce Risks at Facilities 74
Objective 2: Communities
4.2.2 Restore Community Health
4.2.3 Assess and Clean Up Brownfields .".'.'." 82
4.2.4 Sustain and Restore US/Mexico Border Ecosystems '.'.'.'.".'.".'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.' J _' J _' _' _' ' ' ' ' ' '' _'.' ™
Objective 3: Ecosystems
4.3.1 Protect and Restore Ecosystems
-------
Goal 5 - Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
Objective 1: Improve Compliance
5.1.1 Compliance Assistance 104
5.1.2 Compliance Incentives 108
5.1.3 Monitoring and Enforcement 112
Objective 2: Improve Environmental Performance through Pollution Prevention and Innovation
5.2.1 Prevent Pollution & Promote Environmental Stewardship by Government and the Public 116
5.2.2 Prevent Pollution & Promote Environmental Stewardship by Business 120
5.2.3 Business and Community Innovation 124
5.2.4 Environmental Policy Innovation 128
Objective 3: Build Tribal Capacity 132
SECTION IV - Cross-Cutting Issues
Environmental Information Strategy 142
Regional Environmental Justice Strategy 144
Reduction of Env. Health Risks to Children and the Aging 148
Regional Energy Strategy 150
Region 6 Agriculture Sector Strategic Plan 152
Strategic Management of Human Capital 156
Homeland Security 158
Innovating for Better Environmental Results: Region 6 Innovation Strategy 160
SECTION V - Accountability
Region 6 Accountability Plan 164
-------
Executive Summary/Overview
This document is the Regional Strategic Plan covering the five year period from 2004 through 2008. It articulates the most important
regional environmental goals, and strategies for achieving those goals. The strategic plan mirrors the EPA national strategic plan in
architecture with a goal/objective/sub-objective format.
The plan is intended to be a living, working document that changes over time. While the plan's focus is on strategic goals, this plan
goes further than a simple recitation of goals. It also establishes an internal system of accountability for Region 6 managers and holds
them accountable for achieving the strategic goals identified in the plan. The plan also shows how internal resources, including FTE,
are tied to the goal structure. In this way Region 6 management can ensure that resources are allocated appropriately and in conformity
with regional strategic goals. The Region has also tried to articulate its strong belief in collaboration and partnership in the document.
This plan was not developed in a vacuum. The Region solicited feedback from its partners, including the environmental agencies in
the 5 states of Region 6. The Region also received input from 40 of the 66 tribes in Region 6, who identified their highest priorities to
the Region 6 Tribal Program in a previous request. The Region has sought to incorporate the results of these discussions into both a
summary section of the plan and also into the body of the document. The Region believes that further communication is needed with
our partners, including those groups and agencies that we were unable to consult with in the first round of discussions. As a living
document, further input into the strategic plan by our partners will be welcome.
The conversations with our partners were meaningful and helped the Region identify: key goals and strategies that we had in common
with our partners, areas where the Region could directly help the partner, and also some areas where our partners did not agree with
either our goal, the measurement that we established for the goal, or the strategy to accomplish the goal.
As we spoke with our partners, several joint priorities consistently emerged as themes, including:
1) Clean Air State Implementation Plans (SIPs) - Our states agreed that the submittal and implementation of clean air SIPs is a
high priority. Several states identified the need for "timely and appropriate" EPA approval of submitted plans.
2) Air toxics - Region 6 states also agreed that the continuing implementation and development of air toxics programs is a high
priority. States also believed that expanded monitoring in this area was needed.
-------
similarly cited water quality as a ton nriorit " ^vr° Stat£S suPPOIted Water Quality Standards and TMDLs as a high priority. Our tribes
several states and the Agency over nutrients X ^^ alS° desired increased monitoring in this area. There was conflict between
numerical standards were improper for rivers Sand6 StatES ^ that reservoirs were a higher priority than rivers and streams, or that
especially by La^corn^nrtTefmdTate^rT'011 " Several states were concerned about implementing SDWA requirements,
compliance assistance activities; the Region 1 6S asked lf more could be done to assist small systems, such as increased
activities. Several^e^sromentioneIH ^ S,tates,,stressed *e importance of even closer coordination on Agency enforcement
icu tne oeneiit of joint enforcement and inspection activities.
States also mentioned aTeed for EPA^rf*^^^ tec*nical and scientific expertise was not being utilized to the fullest capacity.
u uo a oetter job of communicating advances in science and technology to the states.
to Clean Air Art SIPs ^dWat^Qu^y^ndards^ ^^ identified "timeliness of EPA reviews" as an issue, especially in relation
and the Rde^^Verf?t ™ S ^ the Stat6S' and while they were not considered themes, they were important
my mem as well. These priorities are also shared by Region 6 management:
8) Brownfields - Several states cited continuing redevelopment efforts as a priority.
9) Solid waste management - Our tribes and some states mentioned "better so.id waste management" as a priority.
10) Coastal areas - One state identified the protection of coasta, areas and wet.ands as a high priority.
with J1^^dite^r^Se iSSUeS - SCVeral StateS ldentified tribal a"d environmental justice activities as a priority,
^ at .east on an annual basis, aUowing
tionship with our partners, and align our resources ?sc I as *to L K SfS^^" SErVe 3S a ™echanism tO
-------
Region 6 Environmental Challenges
Region 6 boundaries include the states of Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. These states have a
combined population of 33,071,242 and encompass 620,878 square miles. There are also 66 sovereign Indian Nations
within Region 6 boundaries that own approximately 9 million acres of land.
Region 6 geography is composed of rolling prairies, arid deserts, mountains, swamps and bayous, great rivers, gulf
beaches, forests and the U.S./Mexico border. This varied geography and its natural resources have contributed to the
economic growth the area has enjoyed over the past 30 years. Currently, Region 6 produces 56% of the nation's refined
oil, 43% of its cotton and 24% of its cattle and poultry. In 2002, Texas accounted for 18% of total U.S. computer and
electronic exports. The Port of Houston and the Port of New Orleans accounts for a large percentage of the nation's
imports, and the U.S. Mexico Border is the nation's primary gateway for transporting goods to and from Mexico.
As the Region's economy has grown, so has its population. During the last twenty years, the population of Region 6 has
increased by 8,214,186 people. Not only has the population of the Region increased, it has also become more diverse.
Today, minorities account for 42.3% of the Region's total population. The Hispanic population alone has increased from
14.5% in 1980 to 23.5% today.
The economic and population growth noted above has not occurred without environmental consequences. Some of the
major environmental challenges we face to today include the following:
Air Pollution - A complex combination of industrial, economic, political and meteorological factors create a
uniquely difficult challenge to clean air in Region 6. States in our Region constitute some of the most rapidly
growing areas of the country. This results in more vehicles and rising energy requirements, both of which can lead
to increased emissions into the atmosphere. This, combined with a natural resistance to lifestyle changes and
stagnant summer climates, contribute to the challenges we face. Ozone, air toxics and fine paniculate matter are
the primary challenges to clean air in Region 6.
Water Pollution - Most of our large water supply systems use surface water as a drinking water source. Storm
water runoff and discharges from concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFO's) are the primary sources of
polluted runoff. Although more than 95% of the population in Region 6 receives drinking water that meets all
health based standards, forty percent of our rivers and streams are not safe for fishing and swimming.
-------
Our rivers and streams can also be impaired by soils that contain deposits of arsenic or salts, and drought, which
causes low-flow conditions and elevated water temperatures. Despite improvements, municipal sewage treatment
plants remain a source of pollution in rivers because population growth increases the burden on our municipal
facilities.
nenomenon
Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Zone - One of our major ecosystems is the Gulf of Mexico. The hypoxia phe,.«
is threatening the health of this ecosystem. Scientific evidence indicates that excess nitrogen from the 31 state
Mississippi and Atchafalaya River drainage basins drives the onset and duration of hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico.
During the period of 1996 through 2000, the hypoxia zone in the Gulf of Mexico affected 5,454 square miles of
Louisiana s coast, where oxygen is too low to support marine life. Last year the zone was a record 8,006 square
Hazardous Wastes from Chemical and Petroleum Facilities - The Texas and Louisiana coasts are home to
numerous chemical facilities and refineries. Tons of hazardous wastes are generated from these chemical and
petroleum industries. Although refineries and petrochemical facilities have improved waste control and are using
new technologies to reduce or eliminate hazardous wastes, it is important that we track these hazardous materials
trom production to disposal, and keep citizens informed about potential dangers.
Toxic Waste Sites - Most toxic waste sites in Region 6 are located close to where people live and work - the auto
repair shop that uses toxic solvents to clean engines; the dry cleaner that uses volatile chemicals in laundering; the
factory that manufactures metal goods; or the garbage dump that accepts industrial waste. Some of these sites are
abandoned and create significant environmental impacts on the surrounding communities. Region 6 uses a variety
ot authorities to address the acute and chronic environmental problems associated with these abandoned sites.
here are currently 88 active projects on the National Priorities List in Region 6. Region 6 also has the largest
number of underground injection wells in the nation. Billions of gallons of oilfield waste are disposed into these
deep underground formations each year. As a result, strict control of these sites is necessary to assure that our
water systems are not harmed.
Unsustainable U.S. Mexico Border Population Growth - A unique part of Region 6 is the 1,200-mile border
that Texas and New Mexico share with Mexico. The border is the most rapidly growing area in the Region. This
growth has placed a greater demand on land and energy, has increased traffic congestion, and increased waste
generation. Unfortunately, these areas do not typically have the infrastructure necessary to provide for basic
protection of human health and/or the environment. Further, the economy in this area is not conducive to financing
the necessary capital improvement projects. Although the current conditions threaten the area's bio-diversity, air
and water quality, and human health, the problem is particularly acute in regard to water resources.
-------
Environmental Justice - Some of the most serious Environmental Justice issues facing our country today are in
Region 6. With 1200 miles of the U.S. Mexico Border and 56% of petro-chemical manufacturing capacity in the
United States, the region generates 40% of all the hazardous waste in the Nation and disposes of or treats 5% of the
nation's hazardous waste. Region 6 has a major role and responsibility for addressing the concerns facing the
communities around these facilities. Some of our poorer communities are disproportionately exposed to
environmental harms and risks.
Environmental Protection for Tribal Lands - As noted earlier, Region 6 is home to 66 sovereign Indian Nations.
The drinking water provided by the 66 tribal public water supply systems (PWSS's) in New Mexico Indian country
is not in step with the national average of 92% compliance. Currently, only 67% of the tribal population is
drinking water that meets all health based standards. Solid waste is also a concern. More than 600 open dumps are
estimated to exist in Indian country. Uncontrolled open dumps can contain pesticides and other chemicals that
may leach into ground water. Many tribes lack adequate infrastructure to reduce waste streams and recycle
materials such as appliances, automobiles, and tires.
Brownfields - Many areas in Region 6 that were once used for industrial and commercial purposes have been
abandoned. These areas are known as "brownfields." Some of these properties are contaminated, while others are
simply perceived to be polluted. The potential contamination associated with these sites often deters lenders,
investors, and developers from investing in redevelopment. Not only are these blighted areas eyesores, they can
also create safety and health risks for residents, drive up unemployment, and foster a sense of hopelessness.
To meet the environmental challenges outlined above, we will continue to work with our partners and stakeholders
to identify and implement the most effective environmental protection programs available. The balance of this
plan is dedicated to outlining specific strategies, resources, programs and tools that we will use during the next five
years to protect our vital environmental resources and improve public health.
-------
SECTION I
PARTNERSHIPS
-------
-------
Strategic Partnership
TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
December 4, 2(jn_l
Richard E Greene
Regional Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Ke.idon 6
1 445 RPSS Avenue, Suite 1200
Ditllas, Texas 75202-2733
iol'Texas ComniJss
I :nn \\-nUnj; in response to your letter requesting the TCEQ's participation in (he Region 6 slraicgic
plan devctopmcnl process Your Idler also iifks TCEQ lo idenlttyils (op environmental priorities
(or (lie IK-vt Ihrcc lo five ycurs Tin: TCItQ lus been strongly engaged with the Environmental
r.niiiul nrsijiicsiinJ tho EPA in (hoc Hurl 10 align tlic strategic phinniny processes of your aj-cncy
.ind llie states. As such, 1 vicu our involvement in Hie regional plan's development as an active
Kneloscd is u lii-iefUocumcnl suninianzitiglhc Tt'BQ top priorities I look Ibrwjid to tlie follciw-up
discussions prnposcd. I liave directed uppropi late slafTto assist Region 6 on this crfoit. Please eall
meat 512-239-3900 il'vou have any questions.
-------
CEQ Top JPrioi-itie
nncl Regulatory Strategics
focusing 0'A thTn-iamiTrS'"^^;0-Vfsh.1 ,'"~ol° = °l ~ith EPA on slate-assumed regulatory program
flexibility, and tlie scope or ni^rrV^r "C|° 'S n''P'ied- duplication o f technical review, state
P <-! matteis Cnumber o] permits, etc.) subject to real-time oversight
E-valuo-Le u-ncl impr
motl-iods 1.1 sod to protect public hoaltV
, and common sense-.
bject to real-time oversigb
d the environment, using valid
HvtiKtiito llie permitting pro-
mojor uncontcstccl jr>oi~mit £ij
*ppronon to roBuhUorv malters, using cri%-ironni«»tal results as a
meiliocls, anO provitlijig, incerilivcs for the use oPa.ii ELiVlS
r reduce: procossii-i^ times for
Us in ord^i pt:r""IJts ^'^*=rc Appropriate to control pollutant sources vvitli sijirular
LO ue«rcitisc manpo^.CI- ,1Cocis u.nd to provide rclicP to applictiiils
small L>usii-]c-«5.= -^ Pi Cvc'"lt 1O1"1- rcc>'eli jig. and xvcvstc m in im iicalion efVorts by citizens, industi-v-
ss, ^.nci 7OCilJ sovcmment, depending primtH-IIy up"on vol untaiy participation
Oomplinnco ^Vssistiince
rui-ilier JneorporaiL.- compliance assist
>ri spool ions, moniloi-in IT -,i-.,i - r
i-is ct coro ruiicliori t
t<_i Liid I lie rcrtiuliitctl c
• (in pcrmiltin.^;,
mil\- in unclei-sia.i
ses to eiti.en
Develop and implcmcnt performance-based incentives to reward compliance
e^ron^i"n\°?1"r,adoTlTit?''i",EfS"'rV=illU"C= P«-°S™'-"» 1° provide necessary real-time data on
programs public health protection and to measure effectiveness of our regulatory
gr
Air Quality
-------
Continue implementing the Air Emissions Credit Bank, ajnd Trading Program to provide
compliance flexibility, encourage cleaner technology, retlu.ee total air emissions in areas, and
provide more- efficient ernissioii controls
Continue to use current science and research to improve air quality through State Implementation
Plans arid revisions to tHe SIPs to incorporate necessary control strategies and needed reductions
In-iplement I IB .2912 to address grand fathered sources of air emissions, through development and
issuance o f "NTSR. permits that apply T3ACT
Water Supply
Support implementation strategies identified in the 2OO2 State Water Plan through assessincnt of
water availability, environmental needs, promotion of "water conservation, and permitting
Promote and facilitate adoption, of security measures tlaat protect iKc infrastructure and quality of
public drinking water
Water Quality
Within ten years, address each -water body identified with an impaired use in 1 99S by adopting a
TIvlDL, vv'aterslTcd action plan., or take other appropriate actions
Implement point source controls identified in. TJVCIDLs Uarough TPDES peiiiaits \vlien nccessttry to
recluice polKilLUil loadin^gs to Texas -waters
Control storm water disc Harness from industry, construction activities, and mvinicipal separate
storm sewer systems through issuance and future refinement o f general and individua.1 permits
jA-ddress monitoring gaps using available state and federal funding and leverage local government
and third parly resources to contribute to the collection o f q uali ty~assured surface and ground
•water data for assessment o f eiivi ronmental conditions
Implement ii refined and accurate assessment methodology describing sxirfaee water quality,
including tHe active participation, o f stakeholders and EPA during its deveJopnicnt
Develop agreements and strategies integrating the cycle of water quality standards triennial
revie\v -with the cycle of" completing updates to the CW/\ 3O3(d) List, resulting in one list under
consideration based upon already approved standards
-------
ng the need For additional site specific risk
%vasle combustion Facilities
tilize appropriated Funds I -,
.mhurson-iont program canup runiLiining leaking petroleum sloras<= tanks tlTrouijh tile
?rfieioncy
SimpliPy proc^osKt^s iintl rotlu
grants
F*roTiTpLly d
romptly develop refjul .,.,-„„
assed by tl,0 Texas Lesisu'tui-e1 °lh=r 'lm^"nriale implemeiiliUion pUtns to address legislati
^atcr re-sources JT^ontzil data and indicators tl\al gage TCEQ's progress
so innovalivy proy,-ums lo wlrilLoy icill iv j,-^,,
fei'-iiiiy unei^L t-iyoiic-y rcsoLn-ces
^"^y'in^o^^n^na t^lt,lTn"aaio°11"'^"-t Systrcn'ls l° enhance the rel iabi I ity and accuracy of
Sulatecl Facilities inornate, and mventory regulatory actions, environmental data, aj,d
^llaboratc witli GPA in tl
--change Network *" cv<=loPril<=" t o F an cFlcetive National Environmental InFormation
-------
*
ARKANSAS
* *
-------
Strategic Partnership
December 10. 2003
Richard Greene
Regional Administrator
U. S. Environmental Prelection Agency
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
Do
- Mr, Greene:
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the developinent of a strategic plan for ihc
Environmental Protection Agency- Region VI. As you are aware, when the Arkansas
Department of Environmental Quality began our work in developing a Strategic Plan to guide us
from 2001 to 20J 1, your staff actively participated in our discussions. Without this support, our
Plaia would not be as comprehensive as currently wntlcn. Our full Strategic Plan can be viewed
ami printed through our website, adeg,state.ar.us.
Our Plan is undergoing a major revision to accommodate state-led performance based budgeting
initiatives. As it exists today, our plan is centered on six high level goals:
AIR - T(ie air is clean and healthy.
WATER - The physical, chemical and biological integrity of all Arkansas' waters are
protected and enhanced.
LAND - Land-based activities achieve, maintain, and enhance a healthy environtn.cnt.
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT - The Department efficiently ami effectively
applies its resources and authorities to achieve the highest standards of agency and
environ in en till man agent en t.
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT- The public use!, ADEQ information and resources In a
timely and meaningful manner to protect and manage their environment.
SCIENCE AN1> TECHNOLOGY - The Department uses sound science and current
technology to make environmental decisions.
Our Plan is an evolving document, and ihe guidiny principles that are intertwined in all our
activities reflect the importance of using the Plan TO steer our future course:
~f Partnerships/Public Involvement
>• Environmental Results
> Pollution Prevention
>• Geographic Approaches
> Innovations in Compliance and En Torcemunl
>- Education and Outreach
ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
-------
I of indicators developed
mobile,
Increase the number of surface waters meeting all designated uses.
Develop scientifically defensible JBiolic Indicators based on watersheds or site specific
basis,
Develop effective monitoring and assessment strategies for non-point source impacts.
Develop appropriate xvaler quality criteria for threatened reservoirs.
Establish groundwator criteria (crossover to I—and priorities).
Institute compliance inspections every two years on all I_JS"fs.
Reduce time from "cleanups initiated" to "cleanups compl eted".
Expand scope of the State Srowiifield Program to encourage volun.Lu.ry oloanup o
abajadoncd LJST sites.
R-edu.ce waste going to landfills.
Initiate corrective action assessments on landfills in closure status.
Continue the expansion of the participation in the Brown field Program, including the
nc-wly establ i shed Revolving Loan Fund .
Continue to increase the acres oflcnown environmentally in/ipaeted land rotLLmed to
productive use.
Establish ground-water criteria Ccjross°ver to "Water priorities).
.'E (crosses «ll i^i-ogi-nms)
Timely permit issuances, with pollution prevention approaches incorporated as
app ropr i ate .
Timely address of high priority violators, while reducing permitted facility non-
compliance through more efficient inspcctions.
Consistency
Coord.ina.tion and cooperation among programs, breaking doxvin tlio "silo" concepts
historical in environmental programs.
Kocus available resources (people, equipment, dollars) based on environmental prioriti
-------
Obtain GJPS readings on all permitted facilities and corrective action sites, and
incorporate into GIS mapping tools for targeting resources and. decision malting actions.
Develop electronic permit application capabilities.
Develop electi-onic reporting capabilities.
Continued xise ofsound science arid Quality analysis as the -foundation, for environmental
decisions.
Continued development and utilisation of an integrated information system.
! OUTItEA-CH (crosses all pi-ogr-ams>
• Continue to partner with local arid state agencies to support ozone edLication.
• Implennent effective -waterslied based education and outreacli prog^-arns tai-gctirig -water
bodies based on impaired v^aterbody listings.
• Continue joint efforts -with adjaceiit states for environmental in-iprovements in shared
resources.
• Strengthen, pollution prevention program and message.
» Continued maintenance and development of easy to use, effective -website.
While the aforementioned information does iiol reflect all of the Department's activities, nor
docs it reflect all the priorities of the Department over the ne^ct ten years, it does reflect the major
items we hope to address given existing resources. \Ve •will continue to be vigilant in
en viron mental ste-wardship a.iid -will continue to be led by our mission, tffcf frroftsctt enhances ftitef
restore fftfx etivir>ruein& cff all s4r~/cajr.f£zstK".
Sincerely,
IVIarcus C. 31>e
Director
-------
-------
Strategic Partnership
State of Louisiana
Department ol' Kn\ ironmentiil Quality
Richard E. Greene
Regional Administrator
United Slates Environmental Protection Agency
Region 6
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200
Dallas, Texas 70821-4301
Dear Mayor Greene:
The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) appreciates the opportunity
lo participate in the Region 6 strategic plan development process. We share vour view '
thai allowing the states to have nn active voice in the development of the Regional Plan
we serve to improve operating efficiencies of both the Federal and State Programs.
You will find attached the top priorities that LDEQ will be working on over the next
three lo five years.
If you. have any questions or require additional assistance, please contact Dr Jim Brent nt
(225)219-3233
LHB-03-114
Elizabeth Tan
l Planning DLV
-------
LDEQ Priority Issues/Topics for EPR Region 6
1 Air quality monitoring; NAAQS
a. Ozone attainment programs: Nonattairtrnent with the air quality standard
for ozone in the Baton Rouge area continues to be a major environmental
issue. Continued nonattainment not only impacts the health of our citizens
but also affects the state and local economy. The ozone exceedances
recently experienced in the area -were not forcast and the characteristics of
Investigation of ozone exceedances to pinpoint cause la resource intensive.
To address this will require (at a minimum) the use of regulatory tools,
participation in a policy development effort with regional or federal
entities, development of partnerships within the state or region, and
extensive education of local, state, and national leaders and the public on
the policy and Implementation options.
2. High priority RCRA OPRA facilities
a. Prevention/corrective action of ground water contamination; and.
b. Groundwater use/protection as source of drinking water: Maintaining
adequate quantitiy and quality of groundwater as the primary source of
drinking -water in the state ia a priority issBe. Public understanding and
industry reliance on groundwatttr for cooling water ore the major obstacles
to protecting groundwater. Actions to address this Issue -will include the
use of regulatory tools, voluntary programs, a mix of approaches adjusting
existing plans and reallocating resources, development of a state policy,
development and implementation of state-specific policies, legislation or
regulations and Implementation model(s). and education of local state,
national leaders and public on the policy and implementation options.
3 Brownflelds and Ready-for-Reuse: Both of these programs prevent further
pollution by encourgaing and expediting the clean-up of contaminated sites.
Additional benefits are derived by getting unused/underused properties or RCRA
sites back into useful commerce. Assessment, clean-up and reuse aspects of these
programa may be achieved through innovative approaches in the redevelopment
efforts. The decrease pollution results in safer groundwater and surface water as
possible drinking water sources.
4. Ambient air monitoring stations, water sampling, and data assessment for
regulatory and pollution control.
a. TMDLs: LDBQ develops TMDLs as part of the pollution control strategy
for water bodies identified as impaired (303d list, CWA). Once
established, the TMDLs are incorporated Into the LDEQ Water Quality
Management Plan and availblo as environmental protection tools hi both
permitting and surveillance actions.
b. Nonpoint: This type of pollution has impaired many of the state's water
bodies and restoring them to their designated uses with available resources
continues to be a problem. Most of the nonpoint source pollution issues
extensive and originates from a wide range of sources, many not under the
control of LDEQ. Addressing this issue -will involve the use of voluntary
programs, such as the Louisiana Master Farmer Program developed by
LDEQ and the Louisiana Department of Agriculture, as well as, multi-
stakeholder collaborative efforts and the continued education of local
loaders and the public aa to the problems and possible solutions.
5. Continued Improvement in Accuracy and scope of Databases: Accurate, timely
and complete data allows for appropriate environmental assessments, which lead
to better decision making abilities with respect to permitting and enforcement
activities. Compatability Issues between the states' and EPA's database systems
pose challenges that delay the efficiency of assessments and subsequent decisions.
LDBQ will continue to work -with EPA, industry and the public to improve both
accuracy and assess! bility.
6. Multimedia Inspections and monitoring strategies: Facilities are schedule for
inspections on anew monitoring strategy as required by new Legislation (Act 217,
2003). It provides LDEQ flexibility to perform routine and in-depth inspections
that will ensure compliance with federal and state regulations and protect public
health and the environment.
7. Permit activities, multimedia
a. Continue to reduce permit backlog: LDEQ developed issuance strategies
for both air and water permits for dealing with backlog and timeliness
issues. Water permits will also include addressing TMDLs and other water
quality Issues. Issuing timely permits will achieve greater environmental
protection and benefits to public health and safety.
b. Environmental assistance and multimedia awareness: LDEQ works with
smalt businesses throughout the state offering pollution prevention
opportunity assessments. Small businessmen may request an audit from a
program engineer in an attempt to verify potential (or real) compliance
issues. Trie business owner is ultimately provided a report detailing
pollution prevention or waste minimization, suggestions to reduce
emissions.
8. Enforcement actions: In an effort to ensure public health and safety, LDEQ
responsibility to appropriate parties. Recent developments in this area Include
establishing a policy to document penalty calculations that demonstrate consistent
treatment for violations. Mew legislation (Act 1196, 2OO3) give LDEQ authority
-------
to establish an expedited enforcement program for minor violations, with a pilot
program and a report to the environmental legislative committee.
9. Environmental incidents and citizens' complaints: Due to these activities typically
being unplanned (and unwanted) events, they pose an imperative nature to
respond with a certain degree of urgency. LDEQ responds to unathorized releases
and citizens' complaints of environmental violations. Regional personnel are
utilized to maximize efficiency and flexibility. "On-call" response to the events is
available twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week.
10. Resource Conservation Challenge
a. Waste minimization: LDEQ supports a voluntary partnership approach
for heightening the awareness of business leaders, then- customers, and the
public regarding sustainable green markets and good corporate
environmental stewardship. Toward this end, LDEQ conducts the
Environmental Leadership program to foster efforts of reducing wastes in
the industrial, large commercial and governmental sectors.
11. Support other agencies in coastal restoration issues.
-------
-------
Strategic Partnership
BILL RICHARDSON
State of New Mexico
ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT
Office of the Secretary
Harold Runnels Building
JJ9O St. Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110
Santa re, New Mexico S7502-611O
Telephone: (505) 827-2855
Fax: (SOS) 827-2836
RON CURRY
SECRfTAKt
DERRITH WATCHMAN-MOORE
DEPUTY SECKE TA K K
December 12, 2003
Mayor Richaid E. Greene
Regional Administrator
L'SCPA Region 6
1445 Ross Avenue. Suite 1200
Uallus, IX752O2-2733
Re- Strategic Planning 2004
Enclosed you will find the New Mexico Environment Department's (NFvlED) top priorities ami
yoals tor the coming year. This comes in response to your letter requesting this informutian
Since lakimi over the Department on January 1, 2003, my senior sl;ilYle;un ;uul myself have been
engaged in a philosophical re-in\ igoration oHhe Department. We hope that by focusing NMBD
on three themes we will make a lasting impact on the state, eitixens and environment of New
Mexico. Briefly put. these themes iu-c-
1. A holistic approach to the prolcctioii ol'human health and the en^ ironnient. IT we arc to
have a mcamngnji impact on the public health and environment in this state, the barriers
befween programs must he blurred. We must also use the tremendous amount of in formation
we collect iinil analy/e lo osubhsh envimnmenliil bjisehnes lor etunmunilies across the slide
Now it is lime, usiny the best technology available, to find ways to combine and make thiil
information more easily accessible, and usable tor decision-making and getting to results that
matter.
2. A greater emphasis on diversity. We hope thai by hiring anil promoting more well-
qualified people of color it will help us do our job better as our agency will better reflect
New Mexico. But more importantly, as we improve our ability as a department to
communicate across racial, linguislie and socio-economic lines, public participation imd
the quality of our decisions \vill impiove.
-------
C^jrcatijij
Jo-vel. \V.
oi-kfoi-cc th-.it i:
I i-e-ward higl-i pe
—-- . "^eoi-ripli^hi,-,^, vvh;
icl to provide nioro trainir
-csslTjlly By doing this Wl
onal responsibility and, IT
cntly
t the Iti^licst
; Tor workers
rton-nance and converse] y pro^-icl^- , ,,,^v
U xve ixeiscl tl-»«m lo. Tins ^vill not ho sinK ,,, ^vm, -L^ xves
S to holp people go. the skills tlicy iieiscl lo a<> their job
Lit 7->roc:lT.ictivity, give (SJN-1BO staf't" jj.roater
1]
nlly, hi
; more- fu
Thank you for tl:
nental ^,-is
i and HP X
T- t hope that 1
-------
Strategic Goals Jor 2OO4
1 2/1 I/O 3
Regional JHaze: Begin to implement the plan, approved by EPA this year, to corn bat regional
ha^.e in New Mexico's National Park and wilderness areas. New Mexico opted lor Section 3O9
under the C*lean Air Act. "We hope to be on track for "natural conditions" in tliese areas by 2CXS-4-.
as the aet requires.
IMew Source Review: NIFvtED is fighting, this weakening of air quality protections, along, with a
dox.en other states. This change in the NSR. Program will affect about SO facilities in "New
Mexico, including coal-fired power plants, large oil and gas facilities and copper smelters. The
change will also affect many similar facilities in surrounding states that ha\'c an impact on TMew
Mexico's air,
ES Primacy: The state is strongly considering set-king primacy for surface water
protection. It is currently one of only a handn.il of states that does not have this program.
Coordinate Joint Enforcc-rnent Efforts: r-JMED liopes to better coordinate enforcement actions
with EPA. in the coming year. We believe good strong enforcement is key to environmental
compliance. This is especially important in trie area o f drinking \vater. As the Lumber tori episode
in 2OO3 revealed, IMFvlED is actively working to improve in this area.
En-viromncittal Justice: NUV1EO will continue its 18-month examination ol' environmental
fustiee issues in 2OO-4. This push \vill establish our principles and policies in environmental
justice matters and related social equity issues. This will mark the first time that any state agency
in Mew N/lexieo has addressed these issues in a formal collaborative effort with interested
rnciTibers of the public, environmental justice communities and Tribes.
, C7orrecti-ve Action Order: The Oepartmcnt hopes to settle its C"orreetive Action Order
with Los Alamos relational Laboratory to insure trial a fence-to- fence investigation and clean xip
is undertaken at that facility.
San Juan Basin Ozone: The Deptirtrnejit entered into an Early Action Oompact with EPA and
local governments in 2OO2 to address the o^one problem in the San Juan Basin. Ozone levels in
the basin have been elose to exceeding the federal health based standard. In 2OO4, the
Department expects to finalise tin analysis of the cause of o^.one in the basin, and determine
whether federal ambient standards \\'ill be exceeded in. the future. If emission control strategies
arc recfLiircd, the Ocpartment will develop tJicsc in conjunction with local government and seek
the required regulatory authority from the EIB by the end of 2OO-4.
-------
-it^i 7 , i°-f °, Rc8"latio"s: The OSMA Bureau will seek regulatory ehonyos to protect
r,r,"r H i .workers rrom "" Hie joh violence. These will bo the first worker salety rules
•ee-i 1 I - Uuslt?nod to ailclrcss tlie j.rowins violence pi-obleiiT For late niuhl workers. The
,(-2004""" a system of
monitoring \A,rcl I registration and da.la mii.nay;ement tliat \vould include fees; n dry cleaners
tvpes oT fe.os tt> support such a lurid.
-------
-------
Strategic Partnership
H>JECI
STfVENA THOMPSON
OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
No
ember 3, 2003
Richard li. Greene
Regional Administrator
USEPA Region 6
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200
Dallas. TX 75202-2733
Re: Strategic Planning 2O04
Dear Mr Greene:
As requested, please And our recommendations for allocating resources and idcnlifyiv
program priorities enclosed. Our ideas about how the Region and the Oklahoma Dcparlmc
of Environmental Quality can work together to effect operating efficiencies and cconomn
will provide higher levels of environmental protection for QUT citizens.
This is the first time in a very long time that the offer to speak with one voice to nation
program managers has been made at the Regional Administrator level. Yet, in our view, ll
pnnuiry function of the Region is just llinl. This is iin opportunity for the Region
reestablish its mission. We are hopeful that our future discussions will be meaningful ni
look forward to working with you.
707 NORTH ROBIHSQH, P.O. BOX Ib?7, ORJIHO/MOTY, OKIAMOHA 73101-1 o77
-------
1. Training, Technical, and Rules Interpretation Assistance
• Early Action Compact/Regional Haze Inventory, Modeling and Analysis
WE will continue to work to obtain the funding and develop the in-house expertise
to do this work. Some of the early work especially as it relates to Early Action
Compact work will have to he done by a contractor. We also hope that the
technical projects undertaken by CENRAP will provide the basis for a lot of our
technical work necessary to develop regional haze SIPS. The Regional Office cm
help by working with us to continue to provide in a timely fashion the rules and
guidance we need to evaluate our situations. We also need EPA to support the
training efforts needed by states with limited resources to enable us to develop the
inventory, modeling and analysis skills necessary to develop adequate SIPS.
• New Source Renew Implementation
Although we are a SIP approved state and have until January 2, 2006 in which to
implement these new rales, we have already begun the process of analyzing how
we should proceed. Removing the argument of whether the new rules are more or
less protective of the environment, our biggest concern is choosing a. pathway that
leads to an implemented set of rules that the regulated community, the public and
our staff cm understand and enforce. EPA's challenge is to develop the expertise
and guidance to explain these rules so that states.and the Regional offices are
interpreting them in a consistent manner. This will become even more important
as the states who choose to do something other than adopt the rules verbatim
begin to submit their demonstrations of adequacy.
• Land Protection Training Needs
As has been discussed between Region 6 and the Land Protection Division staff
during mid-year and end-of-year meetings/calls, training associated with
hazardous waste sampling, Compliance Monitoring Evaluations (CMEs), RCRA
Air Emissions (specifically Subpart CC), and permit writing remain as significant
needs. Regional staff that are versed on these topics should be utilized to provide
training to states staff on these topics. Due to state staff turnover, EPA initiatives,
and other EPA mandates, the Region should provide more training for state staff
' '
beneficial if EPA could provide real technology, training, general information or
recommendations for systems to the DEQ, particularly small systems, to achieve
compliance with the new rules so that the information could be shared with the
regulated communities.
• On-Sile Sewage Funding
Oklahoma's on-site sewage program is designed around our unique
environmental factors, the needs of our citizens and on-site industry within
Oklahoma. Lack of sufficient funding, our inability to conduct research on new
innovative on-site sewage technologies and the lack of data/information sharing
with other states inhibits Oklahoma's ability to improve our on-site sewage
program. Funding is needed to establish training centers and to provide grants for
independent third party research/evaluation of current, future or alternative on-site
systems. In-state on-site training centers assist in informing the public about the
different on-site system options and insure adequate training of on-site system
installers, site evaluate and regulators. Grants to fund on-site research will
provide us with information that will allow consistent and equitable application of
the many types of on-site technologies and product performance claims made by
manufacturers. Answers to many of oar on-site questions are present in existing
research. Unfortunately, this research is not readily available to state regulators.
The development of a national on-site research database, accessible by state
regulators, will enhance each states on-site program and promote scientific data
based decisions. Accessing existing research will insure the efficient use of
research dollars and provide a national unified reference for on-site systems.
2. Funding
• Air Tades Monitoring/Toxics Rule Development
Our approach to air toxics will incorporate a two-pronged approach. Over the
next 12-18 months we will conduct rule making with the intent of streamlining
and enhancing our existing toxics rule. In addition we will continue to develop
our in-house expertise relative to monitoring and the collection of data.
-------
• TMDLs: Additional Funding Needed
Oklahoma has developed new processes for assessing monitoring data resulting in
a more accurate 303(d) list of impaired waters. Thus, we know with some
certainty where and how many TMDLs we must do. Completing TMDLs is a
very important task that the DEQ faces in the coming years. Based on the total
number of TMDLs to be performed, EPA must provide additional funding to
assist the state. This should be in the form of earmarked grant funds from the
319(h) program or 104(b)(3) program, as the 106 grant is already over committed
for the NPDES Program. Another possible method of EPA providing assistance
would be to assign experienced EPA staff to either perform some of the TMDLs
or to provide a contractor to our state that could perform some of the TMDLs.
Assistance is going to be key to ensure that ODEQ completes the more than 200
TMDLs at a cost of more than SI 2 million over the next three years.
• Increased Funding Needed for Slate Labs
Implementation of increased monitoring for public water supply systems (PWSS)
will be a priority for the State Environmental Lab in the coming years as a
number of new Safe Drinking Water Act monitoring requirements become
effective. State fees fund the costs of these analyses and are adequate to sustain
the program once it is started- However, with dwindling state resources,
equipment purchases to start-up new testing is an on-going problem. At present
this problem is most significant in the public water supply area, but it is a
recurring problem whenever any media area develops new action limits based
upon the availability of new technology with lower detections and companion
data indicating human health or environmental effects at levels lower than in the
past The Region should work to develop funding mechanisms for state
environmental laboratory capacity building. A model for this sort of program
exists in the CDC with the state capacity development grants that are currently
being made to public health laboratories in response to homeland security
concerns. Also, there are greater loan needs for PWS infrastructure to remove
money from that DWSRF grant for such equipment
3. Regional Consistency
• Title V Permit Renewals
We will complete the initial issuance of Title V permits within the next 3 months
or so. We will then begin the work of issuing renewals. Many lessons have been
review these permits is important as well. We believe it is important that a
consistent interpretation and application of federal requirements be required of the
states by the regional offices and of the regional offices by headquarters. Il is also
very important that we get feedback and input on permits we submit for review by
the Regional office anil to questions we submit in a timely manner. Timeliness of
responses continues to be a problem in this area.
Oil/Gas Facilities
Developing data is beginning to suggest that this sector is much more of a
problem than we had originally thought, especially in the rural area. Of all the
sectors we regulate, this industry has traditionally been given the most deference
and thus you have each state treating them differently. We have begun
discussions with the Regional office and the other Region 6 states to try and
develop a framework for looking at issues related to this industry in a like
manner. It is very important that the Region be given the latitude and tools from
headquarters to continue this work.
4. Tribes
Federal Focus Weeded Nationwide-Indian Lands At Risk
The first step in planning is identifying environmental risks and noncompliance
patterns that are national in scope, offer potential "of significant environmental
improvement, and that demonstrate a need for EPA to focus federal compliance
and enforcement resources. Since Oklahoma, as are most other slates, is
authorized for the RCRA program exclusive of a few provisions including
inspection and enforcement authority on/at tribal trust lands, the DEQ believes
that there should be a federal focus with these lands nation wide relative to RCRA
and the solid waste program The DEQ has received numerous complaints related
to "open dumps" that upon investigation are determined to be on tribal trust land
for which only the EPA has authority to inspect and enforce. Further, the DEQ is
concerned that tribal trust lands will continue to be looked at by various
intentioned developers (well intentioned and otherwise) as a source for both
hazardous waste and solid waste management activities that are legally beyond
the controls of the states and under on the "radar" of the EPA,
-------
5, Coordination
• Joint RCM Inspectors
There is a need for planning of joint inspections earlier than is presently
occurring. EPA begins planning with Oklahoma to inspect facilities for EPA's
"upcoming" inspection year when DBQ'is already 34 months into, its inspection
year. Actually the planning has been more along the Ikes of phone calls from
EPA saying, "Hey, we want to inspect these facilities in a few weeks." DEQ is
then forced to revise its inspection schedule to accommodate EPA. We need
advanced planning to better accommodate the needs of both parties. In addition,
any change or revest for joint inspections previously planned and agreed needs
to be communicated in writing to the DEQ Policy and Planning Director,
including identification of i cleat need for revision.
• Revisit Compliance Evaluation Inspections (CEls)
Compliance Evaluation Inspections (CEIs) have long been a part of the 106-
fimded program. However, the requirement for major facilities to receive a CEI
each year has outlived its usefulness. The major facilities are typically better
maintained and have operators with a greater level of competence. Since CEIs are
time and labor intensive, it would be more appropriate to target facilities with a
history of repeated noacompliance, regardless of size or industry sector. This
would lead to overall better protection and restoration of the environment
However, if EPA is going to continue to focus CEI requirement on majors, it
would be beneficial for the Region to actively participate in state ltd inspections
to increase our available resources. This way me inspections are completed, but
in a shorter period of time so that efforts can be focused on other noncompliaut
systems.
6, Enforcement
established, a framework to insure thai a baseline of enforcement expectations is
met becomes a. key component. The regional offices must then be given both the
responsibility and resources to insure uiat a consistent approach to
compliance/enforcement is maintained by the states within the Region, once an
agreed upon baseline is established. For example, in the air program, the High
Priority Violator policy provides an excellent baseline to work fitjm. Assuming
that the states are meeting their minimum obligation, it is their responsibility to
implement the program with support from the regional office through training
opportunities and technical support.
• EPA should recognize and understand that al] enforcement programs should be
operated in accordance with the concepts outlined in the executed
-------
-------
Strategic Partnership
Tribes
Region 6 has 66 federally recognized tribes and pueblos located in New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas and Louisiana. The Tribal Affairs Office
partners with the tribes and pueblos to address environmental issues in Indian country in a variety of different settings. For instance EPA
managers, staff, tribes and pueblos meet annually during a Tribal Environmental Summit (Summit) to discuss national and regional '
environmental issues. On a quarterly basis, the Regional Tribal Operations Committee (RTOC), consisting of EPA managers and Tribal leaders
works with EPA to discuss current environmental issues relevant to tribal governments. '
Another facet of partnering between the region and tribes is the creation of an EPA Region 6 Ombudsman. The Ombudsman will elevate tribal
concerns and act as a liaison between the tribes and EPA. ual
In addition to the Ombudsman's activities and the discussions held during the Summit and the RTOC, the tribes were asked to submit a list of
their environmental needs and priorities to the Tribal Affairs Office. This information is used to assess the efficacy of Region 6 programs and
grants in addressing the tribes' self identified issues. The top three priorities identified by the tribes are capacity development water quality
and solid waste. These three priorities are also addressed as the Regional Long Term Strategic Targets. Listed below is the number one
priority for tribes that provided a response.
Capacity Building: Apache, Delaware Tribe, Eastern Shawnee, Kaw, Kialgee, Mescalero of Apache Tribe, Miami, Pueblo of San ndefonso
Sac & Fox Nation, United Keetowah Band, Wyandote Nation '
Water Quality: Acoma, Alabama/Quassarte, Chickasaw Nation, Isleta, Jemez, Picuris, Sandia, Santo Domingo, San Juan Seneca Cayuea
Tesuque, Zia ' "
Solid Waste: Cheyenne & Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma, Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma, Laguna, Seminole
Air Quality; Choctaw Nation, Ysleta del sur Pueblo
Enforcement & Compliance: Ponca
Emergency Response: Jena Band of Choctaw, Pueblo of Taos
Environmental Education: Jicarilla Apache Nation, Pojoaque, Tonkawa
Jurisdictional Issues: Delaware, Otoe-Missouria
Toxics: Chitimacha (Asbestos), Modoc (Lead)
-------
REGION 6 PARTNERSHIP STATEMENT
AND
COLLABORATION
-------
REGION 6 PARTNERSHIP STATEMENT AND COLLABORATION
PROCESS OF INCLUSION
c v, R eaion 6 nartner values human health and the environment and strives to ensure that each is fully protected. Each
Each ^f011. 6 P^f^T^orities goals, objectives, and strategies and best understands their own unique issues and
partner als c.has then^^^ md acknowledge the value that each partner adds to the process of protecting human
heaZanTthe en^u-onment We have, therefore, carefully considered our partners' priorities, concerns and local .ssues m
the development of this plan.
K „ t=,kPn to ensure full collaboration with our state and tribal partners. In February of this year we
Several actions have been tak.en to. and asked them to review the document and provide comments, questions
sent each state a copy of our dratt ™Zl°™ V between senior managers of the respective organizations to answer
and criticisms. ™^£££^^£££5&n. the Regional Administrator sent a'letter to each State
questions and resolve ""^^nortance of state input into the strategic planning process. In that letter, the Regional
Commissioner reiterating the imPortanc^S™^'"Pmissioner to provide a summary of their state's environmental
Administrator asked each State E™?°™™^m™o^ ^vision Directors were directed to contact their state
priorities for the next 3-5 years A the ^J™^ ;° priorities and identify any areas which might require further
counterparts in each program al^to compare s *^ ls identifled, was provided to the States in mid-December
SSSr^«JS^^y^S±LnU but also for the identification of any areas where their goals have not
been fully incorporated into our plan.
-r -t- oic r.r strategies Region 6 will strive to mutually resolve the issue for the
., , _ r>,,rincr the first Quarter of FY2004, we contacted each of the 66 tribes
Input was also sought from our tribal partners. Ehmng the fi«^^ ^nvironmental priorities for the next 3-5 years. We
within the Region's boundaries and asked «^ identify fte^top ^ ^^ fa ^ ^^ ^^
received feedback from approximately twotod "f *°s^?^discu!jon at each of our recent tribal summit meetings.
into the strategies and goals outlined in our plan.
-------
We view the communication and coordination efforts to date as a first step in the development of a Region 6 Plan that will
be a living, evolving document. Our goal is to use this plan to continue meaningful engagement between ourselves and
our partners as we further develop program priorities, annual performance goals and resource distribution proposals. With
the Region, States and Tribes working in concert, we believe that this plan can be used as a valuable tool to inform and
influence the development of Annual Program Guidance, annual performance goals and Performance Partnership
Agreements (PPAs), thereby, reducing transaction costs, increasing efficiency and providing maximum protection to the
environment and human health.
PRIORITIES OF OUR PARTNERS
Region 6 has attempted to integrate the priorities identified by our State and Tribal partners into this strategic plan. As
States and Tribes develop new priorities and shifts occur in current priorities, then this document can be modified to
reflect those changes. In this way, the document will serve as a vehicle for continuous communication between the
Region and its Partners on strategic thinking.
INITIATIVES
The Region is currently working on several initiatives to improve the process through which the Region works with its
partners. By creating true partnerships with States, Tribes, and other organizations, the Region believes that protection of
human health and the environment will be enhanced.
First, the Region is seeking to unify the various agreements that occur between each State and the Region during the year.
This concept, known as the "one document" concept, envisions all the commitments between a State and the Region,
;, in one agreement which then becomes fixed and can only be re-opened if there is
egional Administrator and the leader of the state agency signing the agreement. This unified
- • "• ^ ' --•;" "^,-OOQ iooiip.s. such as strategic
including Regional obligations.
agreement between both the Regional Administrator and the leader of the state agency signing in«* «&••
document will be the basis for discussions between the Region and State and will address issues, such as strategic
thinking, annual work plans, measurement systems, accountability of both the State and Region, communication issues,
delineation of roles and responsibilities, and innovations activities. Second, the Region is exploring needed revisions to
the oversight process. The Region believes that it is time to revise the current oversight systems to reflect an increased
role of States and other entities with delegated programs as true partners in the process. Currently, the Region is
developing proposals that will increase State opportunities to participate in the process, such as joint program evaluations
using jointly determined criteria, differential oversight schemes, and increased State autonomy in resolving issues raised in
the joint program evaluations.
Additionally, the Region is developing a draft Partnership Policy upon which it hopes to solicit feedback upon from the
states in the near future. This policy provides guidelines for achieving true partnership between the Region and States.
-------
Use of Collaboration by Region 6
Region 6 believes in utilizing collaborative processes to achieve improved results through conflict resolution, conflict prevention,
communication, and problem solving. By bringing together the energy and ideas of all interested parties, creative solutions and
additional resources are often brought to bear. In addition, by allowing all parties to be heard, such processes result in decisions which
enjoy greater acceptance and support, making implementation more effective.
The Region has been very successful in using collaboration to resolve conflicts. For instance:
- Region 6 facilitated the resolution of a major water quality standards conflict between the States of Arkansas and Oklahoma,
resulting in a Statement of Joint Principles and Actions by the two states that will improve water quality in shared waters.
- At the El Paso Metals Superfund site, the Region helped to convene a meeting with parties from the City of El Paso, federal
health agencies, State environmental and health agencies, and neighborhood representatives, to discuss issues and health
concerns relating to EPA's soil cleanup plan. The meeting resulted in the formation of three multi-party workgroups to
develop new approaches to help resolve those concerns.
Region 6 is also using collaborative processes to avoid conflicts from developing initially or catching the issue before a crisis ensues.
For instance:
- Region 6 has set up a series of regular meetings with private agricultural interests, state agricultural agencies, state
environmental agencies, and other federal agencies to discuss concerns with environmental regulation in the farming sector.
By acting early, the Region was able to head-off impending problems and develop pro-active solutions, such as new
approaches to compliance assistance in that sector.
- The Region has also convened meetings with petrochemical industry representatives to gain their perspective on how best to
address homeland security threats. This has allowed the Regional Response Team to develop an important network of industry
contacts with expertise on emergency response issues affecting their sector.
Collaborative techniques have also proven very effective as a tool for enhancing communication. For example:
— The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster necessitated an exceptionally high degree of collaboration among EPA, NASA, and
FEMA, as well as among numerous state and local agencies. A "Joint Information Center" was established so that the federal
agencies spoke with one voice on issues that arose related to the Shuttle recovery efforts.
-------
- A year ago, Region 6 brought together federal agencies, State environmental agencies, Tribal members, environmental
groups, and community groups for a Regional Listening Session on Environmental Justice issues and possible solutions. Now,
several states and tribes have indicated an interest in partnering with EPA to hold listening meetings to focus attention on
problems affecting their communities.
Collaborative processes have also been used effectively in Region 6 as a problem solving tool, with parties coming together to work
out thorny issues. For example:
- Senior managers from Region 6 and State of Texas meet frequently in Waco - the halfway point between their respective
offices in Dallas and Austin — to work through issues that have become "stuck" in one agency or the other. The most recent
meeting led to a joint protocol for establishing reasonable assumptions for risk assessments at combustion facilities.
- The Region, working with state, local, and federal agencies, in addition to several environmental groups, used facilitated
mediation to resolve concerns regarding the Houston/Galveston Area SIP submission, thereby averting restrictions on federal
highway funding in the Houston area.
- Region 6 worked with the City of Oklahoma City, the University of Oklahoma, community groups, private developers, as
well as state and federal agencies, to find effective ways to redevelop a contaminated, industrial section of Oklahoma City.
Region 6 and its States and Tribes have found that collaborative techniques are not only useful in resolving many types of issues, but
that their use is also very efficient in both staff time and financial resources. As budgets decrease, agencies must find tools for cutting
costs and being more efficient in resolving disputes and other issues; collaboration is one such tool. Resolving issues early avoids high
litigation costs, and also allows the agencies to focus resources on their shared mission to protect human health and the environment.
Collaboration also has the benefit that it builds trust and relationships among the interested parties. This makes the resolution longer
lasting and better perceived by the participants.
The Region takes seriously the need to be a good and effective convener. This is especially challenging in the area of tribal relations,
where cultural differences are great. Instead of mandating that tribes follow western patterns and practices of conflict resolution and
communication, Region 6 has tried to adapt itself to the patterns and practices of the tribes with which it interacts. For instance:
- In working with the Mescalero Apache to resolve water quality issues on their reservation, Region 6 adopted a collaborative
approach to solving the problem, which complimented the Tribe's philosophy.
-------
— The Region is currently working on a project to identify specific conflict resolution and prevention techniques from tribal
peacekeepers. From this, the Region hopes to learn about additional conflict resolution techniques and enhance the
communication and dispute resolution between the Region and tribes. Additionally, the Region is developing mediation
training that will focus on cross-cultural issues in dispute resolution.
Region 6 is seeking to expand its use of collaborative processes. For instance:
- The Region is seeking to further incorporate partnership concepts into the relationship with its states through the joint
development of "program review procedures" to replace "oversight protocols." The new procedures will include: jointly
established program criteria, a jointly agreed upon and objective set of measurements, and a jointly conducted program review
to ascertain the results of state delegated program activities.
— To promote effective communication between the Region and its state partners, the Region is also changing the way in
Regional expectations are communicated to state partners. Through a "one document" process, the Region hopes to convey all
expectations for the many state delegated programs in one document, instead of through the multiple, program specific
agreements that currently take place.
Collaboration is a flexible tool that builds relationships, establishes trust, and can result in the greater achievement of Agency goals.
Although there are, of course, situations where litigation or other procedures are necessary, the Region believes that, where possible,
collaborative processes should be employed.
-------
SECTION II
PROJECTED RESOURCES
-------
REGION 6 PROJECTED RESOURCES - FY 2004
Goal
Goal 1
Total Goal 1
Goal 2
Total Goal 2
Goal 3
Total Goal 3
Goal 4
Total Goal 4
Title
Clean Air and Global Climate Change
Clean and Safe Water
Land Preservation and Restoration
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
NPM
OAR
OW
OPPTS
OSWER
OSWER
OSWER
OSWER
OECA
OECA
OECA
OSWER
OPPTS
OEI
OSWER
OA
OIA
OW
Appropriation
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
LUST
Oil Spills
Superfund
LUST
Oil Spills
Superfund
Base Closure
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
FTE
64.5
64.5
165.0
1.4
166.4
86.6
3.5
1.5
96.8
0.8
7.8
64.0
6.9
267.9
16.9
1.2
14.7
2.2
6.9
19.7
61.6
1 )llll.lls ' '
Dollars will be available January 2004
-------
REGION 6 PROJECTED RESOURCES - FY 2004
Goal
GoalS
Title
NPM
OECA
OPPTS
OA
OW
OSWER
Appropriation
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
FTE
193.5
8.8
2.5
6.1
0.5
211.4
118.0
889.8
Dollars
EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share of the appropriation will not be known until
February/March 2004.
-------
SECTION III
STRATEGIES
-------
Goal 1, Objective 1, Sub-objective 1
Goal One: Clean Air
Objective 1: Healthier Outdoor Air
Sub-objective 1.1.1: More People Breathing Cleaner Air (ozone, sulfur dioxide, Particulate Matter, NOx)
Lead Division: 6PD
Current Condition
Region 6 has seven communities designated as non-attainment for the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for one-hour ozone and eight near-non-
attainment for ozone; more than 9,000,000 citizens live in these areas. The Region expects to designate five of these metropolitan areas as non-attainment for the
8-hour ozone standard. In Texas, nearly one-half of the population lives in areas not meeting national health-based air quality standards for ozone. Air monitors
throughout the Region show that most of the major urban areas in Region 6 are violating, or are very close to violating, the 1-hour ozone standard, and currently
do not meet the new eight-hour ozone standard. Rapid population growth and ever-expanding suburban areas result in more vehicles and rising energy
requirements, both of which can lead to increased emissions into the atmosphere. Litigation over almost all major regulatory actions taken by Region 6 has
compounded the difficulties we face as the Region works to protect and improve the air we breathe.
Strategy Highlights
Region 6 will build on past successes and existing partnerships with our states, industries, tribal communities and the public to accomplish our goal of cleaner air.
We will use regulatory, market-based, and voluntary programs to review and approve SIPs, monitor State compliance with the 1 hour and 8 hour ozone rules,
provide technical support to States and Tribes and encourage our partners to use non-regulatory/innovative air quality programs such as the "Adopt A School Bus
Program." Region 6 will also work with the Regional Planning Organizations, as well as state and local agencies, to develop the Regional Haze SIPs. [The
States of Texas and Louisiana agree that ozone, the use of effective permitting tools, and regulation development and implementation are priorities.
Monitoring tools to track improvement in air quality and grants were also cited by both states as priorities. The State of Oklahoma cites the need for
EPA support in providing training, guidance and expertise in the development of SIPs as a priority. Oklahoma also cites the need for greater
consistency, coordination and communication between the states and EPA to ensure the effectiveness of the Title V program. The development of
emission inventories, the capability to conduct airshed modeling and the development of air quality assessment tools are priorities for the State of
Arkansas. Reducing haze in wilderness areas and ozone in the San Juan Basin are priorities for the State of New Mexico. New Mexico also views the
upgrade of their air quality monitoring system and the review of six state ambient air quality standards as priorities.] Region 6 commits to reviewing and
approving State and Tribal submittals in a timely manner.
Long-Term Strategic Targets
• By 2013, five ozone non-attainment areas in the Region will attain standards and the Houston and the Dallas-Ft. Worth areas will achieve progress
toward attainment.
• By 2010 reduce stationary source emissions of paniculate matter by 25 % from the 2000 level, and by 2008, reduce stationary source emissions of
nitrogen oxides 20% from the 2000 level.
10
-------
Goal 1, Objective 1, Sub-objective 1
STRATEGY
Assist the States/Locals/Tribes in their development of clean air plans
that encompass all measures necessary to meet NAAQS.
Use monitoring tools to track improvement in air quality, and preserve
air quality in areas maintaining NAAQS.
Use permitting tools to ensure continued improvement in air quality, and
preserve air quality in areas maintaining NAAQS.
Use the grant mechanism to ensure that State/Tribes/Locals make
progress toward the achievement of environmental results in their air
pollution control programs.
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Review and evaluate State Implementation Flan (SIP) submittals in a
timely fashion, reclassifications/redesignations and boundaries for 1 hour
ozone, 8 hour ozone, Particulate matter, haze and Carbon Monoxide.
Provide technical support to the regional planning organizations
(CENRAP and WRAP) charged with the development of regional haze
SIPs.
Encourage States and Tribes to implement voluntary and innovative
measures to reduce pollution. Continue international air pollution
transport abatement work.
Review 1 and 8 hour ozone data.
Review PM air quality data reported to AQS for validity.
Ensure NSR permits reflect state-of-the art technology.
Ensure states issue Title V permits for existing major sources reflecting
all applicable requirements.
Issue permits to sources on Indian Land and to sources subject to the
Deep Water Port Act.
Negotiate, process, and manage grants that produce high quality, results-
oriented methods to reduce air pollution.
Conduct effective pre-award cost evaluations and technical review of
grant proposals, to achieve the desired results.
Use post-award monitoring, the competition policy, and OAR technical
and grant guidance to ensure the most efficient and effective use of
federal funds.
11
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Number of approvable SIPs received
Number of 8-hour non-attainment designation
decisions
Number of state Title V program/fee reviews
BRAVO Study
UNITS
Approvable SIPs
Designation decisions
Title V program/fee reviews
Report
FY04 GOALS
15
12
2
1
12
-------
Projected FTE for FY 2004
Goal 1, Objective 1, Sub-objective 1
NPM
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Super-fund
6RA
1.0
1.0
6XA
1.5
1.5
6PD
42.0
42.0
6WQ
6SF
6MD
.8
.8
6EN
2.8
2.8
6RC
.5
.5
TOTAL
48.6
48.6
Projected DoHars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004 The Region 6 share of the
appropriation will not be known until February/March 20040
NPM
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Susan Branning
TION
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
13
-------
Goal 1, Objective 1, Sub-objective 2
Goal One: Clean Air
Objective 1: Healthier Outdoor Air
Sub-objective 1.1.2: Reduce Risk from Toxic Air Pollutants (MACT, Clear Skies, Mobile Sources, Diesel buses)
Lead Division: 6PD
Current Condition
Toxic emissions into the atmosphere from both industrial and mobile sources constitute a concern in some areas within Region 6. EPA has promulgated a majority of
Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) and mobile source standards which are providing reductions in air toxics. Region 6 is providing implementation
and compliance enforcement assistance on promulgated MACT rules. There are however, still areas of concern to Region 6 as well as State, Local and Tribal (S/L/T)
agencies.
Strategy Highlights
Region 6 will better utilize existing statutory, regulatory, and voluntary programs to address air toxics issues, as well as identify necessary changes in program
priorities and implementation, to more effectively address air toxics program goals. Region 6 will build on the successes and the partnerships we have with our states,
industry, tribal communities and the public, to solicit and support community air toxics projects. These projects may include emission inventory, air toxics monitoring
efforts and capacity-building to improve S/L/T's abilities to identify and address issues of concern. Oklahoma has identified Air Toxics as a top priority. Region 6
will continue to process MACT delegations to state and local agencies. [The State of Texas cites air toxics as one of their priorities. The State of Oklahoma
cites air toxics monitoring and rule development as priorities and notes the need for the states and EPA to work closely together on these issues. The State
of Arkansas highlights MACT standards as a priority, especially the application of MACT related to landfills. The State of Louisiana has had an air toxics
program in place for over a decade, and it will serve as a foundation for future progress. The state of New Mexico recognizes air toxics as a priority and
would like some additional funding for research. Most States also believe air toxics monitoring is a critical issue].
Long-Term Strategic Targets
• By 2005, the Region will establish voluntary school bus retrofit programs in the 5 communities of Austin, Dallas/Fort Worth, Houston/Galveston and San
Antonio, TX and in Little Rock, AR.
• By 2006, the Region will carry out community based air toxics initiatives that identify and address issues of concern, impacts of toxics pollutants on
populations, and expand inventories and monitoring of air toxics.
• By 2008, the Region will implement or have delegated all major stationary source MACTs and other promulgated national air toxics standards.
14
-------
Goal 1, Objective 1, Sub-objective 2
STRATEGY
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
approach for State/Local/Tribal (S/L/T) agencies
Provide implementation assistance to states and local agencies.
Work with S/L/Ts to develop capacity for implementation of air toxics
efforts focused on urban areas.
Characterize urban and rural ambient air toxics through monitoring and
data analysis. Continue to document the value of passive air toxics
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
UNITS
Number of voluntary school bus retrofit projects
chool bus retrofit projects
Dumber of communities with air toxics projects
air toxics projects
15
-------
Goal 1, Objective 1, Sub-objective 2
Projected FTE for FY 2004
NPM
OAR
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
0.4
0.4
6XA
6PD
6.7
6.7
6WQ
6SF
6MD
0.4
0.4
6EN
6RC
0.5
0.5
TOTAL
8.0
8.0
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share of the
appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
OAR
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Ruben Casso
16
-------
17
-------
Goal 1, Objective 2
Goal One: Clean Air
Objective 2: Healthier Indoor Air
Sub-objective: (none)
Lead Division: 6PD
Current Condition
Currently 3 of the 5 States and 5 Tribes within Region 6 are actively addressing radon issues through grants from EPA. The State & Tribes study radon health issues
and encourage the construction of radon resistant homes and the inclusion of the radon testing and disclosure in real estate transactions.
Within Region 6, there are over 13,000 schools. Some of these schools have various environmental problems including energy efficiency, heating and ventilation,
asbestos, and chemical use ( pesticides and cleansers) all of which lead to bad indoor air quality issues. Many of the 60,000 + students attending these schools are
asthmatics. Poor indoor air quality can trigger an asthma attack. By improving the indoor air quality, student learning, productivity and comfort for students and staff
alike is increased, and absenteeism due to asthma is reduced. Through the implementation of the EPA voluntary program, IAQ Tools for Schools ( IAQ, TFS) ,
schools can save time and money in assessing and addressing indoor air issues resulting in a healthier learning environment.
Over the past 3 years, the Indoor Environments program has responded to an average of 60 calls a week on Mold. A separate phone line was instituted to be able to
address each of the calls in a timely manner. In addition, as the Mold Issue has grown so that the Region has a have the number of calls and inquiries regarding sick
buildings and workplace exposures (fragrances, chemical sensitivities, etc).
Strategy Highlights
The Region will work closely with both urban and rural school districts to encourage their implementation of the IAQ Tools for Schools program. The Region will
continue to build on the success it has had in the past of working with school districts and school organizations to implement he IAQ TFS program and to exceed the
goal of 15% of all schools in the Region implementing the IAQ TFS program. The Region will focus on advancing the Region 6 Healthy Environments and Living
Places for Kids ( H.E.L.P. for Kids) program by empowering organizations to utilize the program and provide in-home asthma education along with general indoor
environmental assessments.
The Region will continue to promote the importance of addressing indoor air issues in solving community based air toxics problems, work with non-profits and
governmental agencies to educate asthmatics about the environmental management of asthma, and to convince smokers to pledge to make their home smoke free for
their children. The Region will implement a pilot project with a non-profit to address indoor air quality issues affecting the aging population in nursing homes. The
Region will continue to respond to the mold issued by addressing special requests and by incorporating this issue into the Region's existing indoor environments
projects. LDEQ acknowledges that this is an important issue, but this issue is not a top priority in their State. The Region understands that Louisiana does not plan to
emphasis healthy indoor air, but we will work with other agencies in Louisiana to accomplish our goals.
18
-------
Goal 1, Objective 2
Long-Term Strategic Targets
By 2008, and consistent with established schedules, more people will be living in homes with radon-resistant features.
By 2008, 15% of the schools districts in.the Region will experience improved indoor air quality.
By 2008, the number of children exposed to second hand smoke in their homes will be reduced by 20%.
STRATEGY
SUPPORTING P
Assist appropriate States and Locals/Tribes in their development and
implementation of their Radon and Indoor Air Quality Programs.
Encourage School Districts to improve indoor air quality through the
implementation of voluntary programs - IAQ Tools for schools.
Host Resources for Schools Symposiums to provide school administration
with a holistic approach to addressing their schools' environmental
problems.
- Provide funding through the State Implementation Radon Grants.
- Provide technical assistance to States and Tribes implementing the
programs.
Negotiate, process, and manage grants that produce high quality, results-
oriented methods to reduce exposure to radon, second hand smoke, poor
indoor air pollution.
- Conduct effective pre-award cost evaluations and technical review of
grant proposals, to achieve the desired environmental results.
- Implement the goals of post-award monitoring, the competition policy,
"" °!AR techn'cal and grant guidance, to ensure the most efficient and
effective use of federal funds.
19
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Homes Tested for Radon
Schools implementing IAQ TfS
Number of homeowners educated on ways to
improve indoor air quality and reduce exposure
to indoor pollutants
UNITS
number of homes
number of schools
number of people
FY04 GOALS
200
200
5000
20
-------
Goal 1, Objective 2
Projected FTE for FY 2004
NPM
OAR
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
4.2
4.2
4.2
4.2
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share of the
appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
OAR
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Monica Smith
21
-------
Goal 1, Objective 4, Sub-objective 1
Goal One: Clean Air
Objective 4: Radiation
Sub-objective 1.4.1: Enhance Radiation Protection
Lead Division: 6PD
Current Condition
As of October 2003, an Environmental Radiation Assessment Monitoring System (ERAMS) was installed in the Region. The Region is collecting samples on a
weekly basis for analysis. The Regional Radiation program provides assistance to the Regional Health & Safety Officer on the Regional Radiation plan. The
Regional Radiation program provides assistance to the states with regards to orphan source disposal as needed. Region receives and reviews compliance reports from
Department of Energy (DOE) facilities pertaining to radio nuclide National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs). Currently, we have 4 DOE
facilities that are required to report. All are in compliance to date. There are 7 Phosphogypsum facilities in the region that are regulated under NESHAPs and are
currently not exceeding the Radon 222 standard.
Strategy Highlights
The Region will continue to work closely with the State and Federal agencies on addressing Radiation issues. The Region will continue to review the facilities
compliance reports to ensure their emissions are within the NESHAP standards. We will continue to collect samples for the ERAMs sampling. Radiation Protection
is not a priority area in Louisiana.
Long-Term Strategic Targets
• Ensure timely disposal of all orphan radiation source disposal.
• Continue to assist Federal and State agencies in addressing Radiation issues.
• Existing and new DOE and phosphogypsum facilities continue to be in compliance with NESHAP.
22
-------
Goal 1, Objective 4, Sub-objective 1
STRATEGY
Continue to assist Federal and State agencies in addressing Radiation
issues
Assist Regional H & S officer with Regional Radiation plan
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Review of plans and reports
Continue to assist States with orphan source reports
Provide training for regional staff
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Number of Facilities in compliance under
Radio- nuclides NESHAPS
UNITS
DOE & Phosphogypsum facilities
FY04 GOALS
11
23
-------
Goal 1, Objective 4, Sub-objective 1
Projected FTE for FY 2004
NPM
OAR
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
6XA
6PD
1.2
1.2
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
1.2
1.2
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA'will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share of the
appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
OAR
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Monica Smith
24
-------
25
-------
Goal 1, Objective 4, Sub-objective 2
Goal One: Clean Air
Objective 4: Radiation
Sub-Objective 2: Maintain Emergency Response Readiness
Lead Division: 6PD
Current Condition
The Regional Radiation Coordinator provides technical assistance to the Regional Superfund Program to address radioactive contamination at cleanup sites including
the Coastal Radiation and Gulf Nuclear removal sites. The Regional Radiation Coordinator is a key player in the planning of various emergency response exercises in
the Regional office and is assisting Office of Radiation and Indoor Air (ORIA) with the Ruby Slipper Emergency Response Exercise. Regional Radiation coordinator
participates in Radiation Emergency Preparedness (REP) exercises with various facilities throughout the region. In addition, training and assistance are provided to
other Federal and State agencies that are involved with Emergency Preparedness-
Strategy Highlights
Continue to provide support to the Regional Superfund program, ORIA and other Federal and State Agencies in the planning and implementation of Emergency
Response exercises involving radiation. The Region will continue to promote emergency preparedness and facilitate training opportunities for the Regional On-Scene
Coordinators and State personnel.
Regional emergency preparedness and response for all hazardous materials, including radioactive materials is addressed under Goal 3,2,1" Cleanup of radioactive
sites is addressed under Goal 3,2,2.
Long-Term Strategic Targets
• Promote emergency preparedness related to radiation throughout the Region.
STRATEGY
Assist Regional Superfund Program and the States and other Federal
Agencies in addressing radioactive contamination at cleanup sites.
Provide training to Regional Superfund Program
Continue to participate Emergency Preparedness Exercises with other
Federal Agencies.
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Participate in Monthly Regional OSC meetings to educate staff on available
tools, sampling techniques, etc., and to continue fostering the working
relationship between the Radiation program and the Regional Superfund
Program.
Participate in planning and implementation of Emergency Planning Exercise.
26
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Cleanup of Radioactive contamination at
Superfund Sites
Number of radiation exercises completed
UNITS
Superfund Sites
exercises
FY04 GOALS
1 (Gulf Nuclear)
2 (Ruby Slippers and Exercise United Defense)
27
-------
Goal 1, Objective 4, Sub-objective 2
Projected FTE for FY 2004
NPM
OAR
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
6XA
6PD
0.7
0.7
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
0.7
0.7
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share of the
appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
OAR
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Monica Smith
28
-------
29
-------
Goal 1, Objective 5
Goal One: Clean Air
Objective 5: Reduce Greenhouse Gas Intensity
Sub-objective: None
Lead Division: 6PD
Current Condition
Region 6 has begun to establish government/industry partnerships to achieve reductions in greenhouse gases (GHG). Region 6 is aggressively conducting outreach to
States, Locals, Tribes, NGOs, and commercial partners to increase Energy Star applications and green building programs. The Region is working with Texas and
OAQPS to implement SIP credits for energy efficiency/renewable energy projects, and is sponsoring a national effort (Center of Excellence for Air
Innovations/Futures) to implement greenhouse-reducing voluntary strategies.
Strategy Highlights
Over the next several years, Region 6 will build on government/industry partnerships to achieve greater GHG reductions. Region 6 will continue efforts to build
capacity and provide state and local governments with technical, outreach, and education services about climate change impacts, mitigation and adaptation, and related
issues so state and local governments may more effectively and comprehensively address their environmental, human health, and economic goals. LDEQ recognizes
the importance of reducing greenhouse gas intensity, but this is not currently one of their top priorities.
Long-Term Strategic Targets
• Through 2008, protect humans, global environments, and natural ecosystems by reducing the harmful effects of ozone depletion and climate change.
Reduce energy consumption from projected levels by promoting fuel conservation and emphasizing energy savings to consumers and businesses.
30
-------
Goal 1, Objective 5
STRATEGY
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Encourage the reduction of energy consumption through voluntary
programs and partnership with Federal and State Agencies, Tribal
Governments and Local Agencies.
Implement MOU with DOE to expand opportunities on energy efficiency
programs.
Partner with State Energy Conservation Offices (SECOs) to enhance
energy conservation programs.
Encourage States and Tribes to implement voluntary and innovative
measures to reduce pollution. Continue international air pollution
transport abatement work.
Aggressively advertise Energy Star and Green Building programs,
particularly in fast-growing communities in order to maximize reductions
in energy use.
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Number of energy conservation workshops
Number of outreach events
Energy Efficient Calculator Project
UNITS
workshops
Events
Guide
FY04 GOALS
3
15
1
31
-------
Goal 1, Objective 5
Projected FTE for FY 2004
NPM
OAR
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
6XA
6PD
1.2
1.2
6WQ
6SF
6MD
0.6
0.6
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
1.8
1.8
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share of the
appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
OAR
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Jim Yarbrough
32
-------
33
-------
Goal 2, Objective 1, Sub-objective 1
Goal Two: Clean and Safe Water
Objective 2.1: Protect Human Health
Sub-objective 2.1.1: Water Safe to Drink
Lead Division: 6WQ
Current Condition
More than 95% of the population in Region 6 receives drinking water that meets all health-based standards that were in effect as of 1994 (total coliform rule and
chemical MCLs). [Arkansas = 92%; Louisiana = 95%; New Mexico = 96%, Oklahoma = 96% Texas = 99% and Tribal populations = 74%]. Region 6 has sustained
this level of protection, which meets our Management Agreement with the EPA Office of Water (OW) and the Agency's national performance measures, for the last 5
fiscal years. As of November 2002, EPA reported that 287 rules have been adopted by primacy agencies representing the 54 States and U.S. Territories. This
represents a national adoption rate of 44%. Region 6 has a new rule adoption rate of 70%. For approved primacy revisions, the national rate was reported as 14% and
Region 6 achieved a rate of 23%. Region 6 States have expressed concerns about public water systems' capabilities to comply with these tougher standards.
Region 6 States will continue to struggle with keeping their primacy programs current, but we expect to stay well ahead of the national average.
Strategy Highlights
We will work to maintain a high level of protection, as more complex and challenging rules are promulgated under the Safe Drinking Water Act and will ensure that
our states adopt these new rules. Region 6 will work with our states and tribal partners to address the substantial challenge of maintaining and possibly increasing the
current levels of funding to sustain the federal, state and tribal drinking water programs. We will assist States and Tribes in ensuring that Source Water Protection
Plans are prepared. [The States of Texas and Louisiana cite Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality Standards and Monitoring and Assessment programs as
priorities. The State of Oklahoma cites capacity building, such as the augmentation of a state laboratory, as a priority to make their Safe Drinking Water
Act monitoring more effective. Region 6 will work with ODEQ through the Region's Area Wide Optimization Program (AWOP) to provide performance
based training to small drinking water systems in an effort to improve compliance with the new drinking water rules. The State of Arkansas cites the
development of water quality criteria for threatened reservoirs and ground water criteria as priorities. Many tribes cite water quality as a top priority.
The State Of Texas cites security measures relating to the protection of infrastructures and quality of drinking water as a priority. The State of New Mexico
believe a holistic approach to liquid waste i.e. septic waste is needed. ]
Long-Term Strategic Targets
By 2008, the percentage of the population served by community water systems that receives drinking water that meets health-based standards will be 95% for
those requirements with which systems need to comply as of December 2001 and 80% for those requirements with a compliance date of January 2002 or
later.
• By 2008, the percentage of community water systems that provide drinking water that meets health-based standards will be 95% for those requirements with
which systems need to comply as of December 2001 and 80% for those requirements with a compliance date of January 2002 or later.
• By 2008, 95% of the population served by community water systems in Indian country will receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-based
drinking-water standards.
• By 2008, 50% of source water areas for community water systems will achieve minimized risk to public health.
By 2015, in coordination with other federal agencies, reduce by 50% the number of households on tribal lands lacking access to safe drinking water.
-------
Goal 2, Objective 1, Sub-objective 1
Continue to assist States, public water systems and Tribes in implementing
drinking water nrncn-amc
Enhance State/Tribal performance in the areas of rule interpretation,
sanitary surveys and drinking water system optimization.
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Provide additional training workshops to states in rule implementation.
Provide direct technical assistance to states and tribes charged with
implementing drinking water programs.
Support national efforts to provide training on new rules via satellite
downlink.
Provide training to states on how to perform sanitary surveys,
comprehensive performance evaluations and SDWIS.
Provide direct technical assistance to states to ensure the completion of
sanitary surveys and comprehensive performance evaluations.
Negotiate, process and manage DWSRF assistance agreements to increase
the number of projects providing better water treatment facilities.
35
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
DWSRF projects that have initiated operations.
Percent of population served by community drinking water systems with no
violations during the year of any Federally enforced health-based standards
that were in place by 1994.
Population served by community water systems providing drinking water
meeting health-based standards promulgated in or after 1998.
Number of community water systems implementing sourcewater protection
programs.
UNITS
Projects
Population
Population
Community Water
Systems
FY04 GOALS
58
92%
85%
850
36
-------
Goal 2, Objective 1, Sub-objective 1
Projected FTE for FY 2004
NPM
OW&
OPPTS*
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
0.2
0.2
1.4
1.4
47.0
47.0
1.6
1.6
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
S0.2
50.2
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share of the
appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
1
NPM
OW&
OPPTS*
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6WQ
6SF
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Larry Wright
-------
Goal 2, Objective 2, Sub-objective 1
Goal 2: Clean And Safe Water
Objective 2.2: Protect Water Quality
Sub-objective 2.2.1: Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis.
Lead Division: 6WQ
Current Condition
Environmental challenges to watersheds in Region 6 include the long term drought in this portion of the country and its impacts on municipalities, discharges from
concentrated animal feeding operations, and the impacts of agricultural and industrial practices on local water bodies. Another significant challenge for the Region is
the lack of comprehensive monitoring strategies and assessment procedures which EPA and states can use to interpret monitoring data, identify impairment, and assess
fish and shellfish safety. Only nine percent of Region 6 rivers and streams are currently being assessed; of the assessed waters, forty-three percent are impaired.
Principal causes of impairment vary by state, but they include siltation, pathogens, mercury, dissolved oxygen and pesticides. The Region has several nutrient-surplus
watersheds, primarily resulting from dairy and poultry operations. Region 6 and the states within the Region are establishing TMDLs at a brisk pace. Through
June, 2003, 59 TMDLs has been established for Arkansas; 391 for Louisiana; 83 for New Mexico; 32 for Oklahoma and 50 for the State of Texas.
Strategy Highlights
Working in partnership with States and Tribes, Region 6 will focus our efforts on high priority watersheds such as the Illinois River and the North Bosque using
various Clean Water Act (CWA) programs such as §319, Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF), National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
and Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). We will ensure appropriate Water Quality Standards (WQS) are established (particularly numeric standards for
nutrients). We will actively participate with U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA NRCS) to maximize use of EQIP
funds to improve water quality in high-priority watersheds. [The State or Louisiana cites water sampling and data assessment for regulatory and pollution
control as priorities and cites non-point source pollution as one of their top priorities. The State of Arkansas cites the development of groundwater criteria,
scientifically defensible biotic indicators for watersheds and monitoring and assessment strategies for non-point source impacts as priorities. The State of
New Mexico views watershed impairments, particularly in rural New Mexico, and the development of a holistic approach to addressing liquid waste as
priorities. New Mexico is strongly considering seeking primacy for surface water protection. Tbe State of Oklahoma indicated a strong preference towards
using a watershed approach to TMDL development and permitting. Region 6 can work with Oklahoma to use funds more efficiently by doing larger scale,
watershed TMDLs where appropriate, instead of multiple TMDLs on many small subsegments of streams and rivers. Most States also identified water
quality standards, including increased monitoring, as a priority. Region 6 commits to reviewing and approving State and Tribal submittals in a timely and
appropriate manner. The State of Louisiana is concerned about the impact of nutrient reduction on coastal ecosystems and wetlands. The State of Texas
views the development of nutrient standards for reservoirs as a priority, but plans to focus on rivers and streams at a later date. The State of Arkansas
agrees that the development of a nutrient standard for reservoirs is a priority, but believes numeric standards are inappropriate for rivers and stream. The
State of Arkansas cited CAFO permitting as a priority.]
38
-------
Long-Term Strategic Targets
Goal 2, Objective 2, Sub-objective 1
By 2012, fully attain water quality standards in over 25% of those water bodies identified in 2000 as not attaining standards, with an interim milestone of restoring 5% of
these waters by 2006.
By 2008, reduce levels of phosphorus contamination in rivers and streams so that phosphorus levels are below levels of concern established by USGS or levels adopted by £
state or authorized tribe in a water quality standard in 55% of test sites for major rivers and 38% of test sites for urban streams and 30% of test sites for farmland streams.
By 2008, improve water quality in Indian country at 10% of monitoring stations in tribal waters for which baseline data are available.
By 2015, in coordination with other federal partners, reduce by 50% the number of households on tribal lands lacking access to basic sanitation.
STRATEGY
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Ensure that 303(d) listings accurately reflect water body impairment throughout
the region.
Assure that States and Tribes have effective, up-to-date water quality standards
programs adopted in accordance with the Water Quality Standards regulation
and the Water Quality Standards program priorities.
Ensure that monitoring strategies and assessment procedures are being
developed that are consistent with the goals of the Clean Water Act.
Ensure the timely development and implementation of approved TMDLs,
including interstate TMDLs.
Assure that States and Tribes have effective, up-to-date water quality standards
programs adopted in accordance with the Water Quality Standards regulation
and the Water Quality Standards program priorities.
Improve water quality on a watershed basis such that the number of
Region 6 watersheds where 80% of assessed waters are meeting all water
quality standards is increased significantly.
Foster the development of local watershed initiatives and promote watershed
approaches to water quality management and improvements.
Provide technical assistance to states in reducing permit backlogs and
addressing significant expired permits.
Assure that current NPDES permits reduce or eliminate discharges into the
nation's waters of inadequately treated discharges from municipal or industria
facilities and pollutants from urban stormwater and CAFOs.
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Tribes with water quality standards adopted and approved (cumulative)
States with new or revised water quality standards that EPA has reviewed
and approved or disapproved and promulgated federal replacement
standards
State-established TMDLs approved (incremental)
TMDLs established by EPA (incremental)
UNITS
Tribes
States
TMDLs
TMDLs
FV04 GOALS
10
4
147
49
40
-------
Goal 2, Objective 2, Sub-objective 1
Projected FTE for FY 2004
ow
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
5.4
6XA
0.8
6PD
6WQ
104.0
6SF
6MD
3.0
6EN
6RC
2.0
TOTAL
115.2
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share of the
appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
OW
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
SEN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Jane Watson
-------
Goal 2, Objective 2, Sub-objective 2
Goal Two: Clean and Safe Water
Objective 2.2: Protect Water Quality
Sub-objective 2.2.2: Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters
Lead Division: 6WQ
Current Condition
Region 6 faces a critical challenge to find immediate and adequate ways in which to restore the Louisiana coastline. No other place on Earth is disappearing as
quickly as the Louisiana coastal ecosystem, where a half-acre of land turns to open water every 15 minutes. Eighty percent of the nation's annual coastal wetland loss
occurs in Louisiana. Dredged material disposal remains a significant concern as navigation channel enlargement and port expansion projects continue to be proposed.
With the shallow Gulf geomorphology, this translates into millions of cubic feet of material destined for disposal each year. The Gulf Coast in Texas and Louisiana is
also impacted by record levels of harmful algal blooms, in the form of red tides.
Strategy Highlights
Region 6 will continue to work in partnership with federal agencies and others to provide funding for the implementation of the short-term actions proposed in the
Hypoxia Action Plan. Under the Hypoxia Action plan, we will assist our state and tribal partners as they develop strategies based on existing programs and the most
cost-effective means of reducing nutrient losses for their waters. To address harmful algal blooms, the Region will continue work in partnership with State monitoring
efforts and continue to provide funding assistance to make progress on achieving our environmental goals. Region 6 will continue its focus on selecting Coastal
Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act (CWPPRA) projects that help offset the Louisiana land loss crisis. We emphasize freshwater diversions, barrier
island restoration, and the use of innovative technologies to build on proven successes. [The State of Louisiana cites the need for continued collaboration of the
State and federal agencies to promote coastal restoration.]
Long-Term Strategic Targets
• By 2008, maintain water clarity and dissolved oxygen in coastal waters at the national levels reported in the 2002 National Coastal Condition Report.
• By 2008, improve ratings reported on the national "good/fair/poor" scale of the National Coastal Condition Report.
* By 2010, in cooperation with other nations, federal agencies, states, tribes and local governments, reduce the rate of increase in the number of invasions by
non-native invertebrate and algae species of marine and estuarine waters.
42
-------
Goal 2, Objective 2, Sub-objective 2
Work in partnership with federal agencies and others to implement the
Hypoxia Action Plan.
Work with the Gulf of Mexico Program on assessment and restoration
projects affecting estuarine ecosystems.
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Negotiate, process and manage grants that implement short-term actions
proposed in the Hypoxia Action Plan.
Use post-award monitoring and Coastal Program guidance to ensure the
most effective and efficient use of federal funds.
Participate actively in the Gulf of Mexico Program's Policy Review and
Management Committee.
Promote better partnerships with federal agencies and other stakeholders.
Annual Performance Measures
'ORMANCE MEASURES
UNITS
Regional score of "fair/poor" where 1 is poor and 5 is good using the
National Coastal Condition Report indicators.
2.5
43
-------
Goal 2, Objective 2, Sub-objective 2
Projected FTE for FY 2004
NPM
OW
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
1.0
1.0
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
1.0
1.0
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share of the
appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
OECA
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
SRC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Phil Dellinger
44
-------
45
-------
Goal 3, Objective 1, Sub-objective 1
Goal Three; Land Preservation and Restoration
Objective 3.1:Preserve Land
Sub-Objective 3.1.1: Reduce Waste Generation and Increase Recycling (MSW)
Lead Division: 6PD
Current Condition
The Region receives numerous public inquiries regarding solid waste including citizen complaints, requests for money, recycling activities, and public participation
issues. The Region receives these inquires as follows: phone calls - about 100 per month, letters - about 4 per month, and web-based - about 17 per month. The
Region 6 States request EPA for rule interpretation and technical support during the year. The Region organizes semiannual technical roundtables for our states in
addition to responding specific issues.
There are over 650 open dumps on Indian Land and only 160 have not been properly closed. About 30 tribes have solid waste management plans and about 40 tribes
have codes, ordinances and regulations in place.
Large amounts of greenhouse gases are emitted from landfills, concentrated animal feedlots, and wastewater treatment facilities. These gases contribute to global
warming. There are 57 landfills in Region 6 where methane gas can be captured and used for energy. Currently 20 of these landfills are converting its methane gas to
energy and 20 such facilities are under construction.
Strategic Highlights
The Region will assist the states in adopting new municipal solid waste regulations expected out this year. The Region is developing partnerships with various entities
to promote the concept of using the methane gas for energy. These partners include state environmental agencies, municipalities, Department of Energy, Department
of Agriculture, landfill owners and operators, etc. The Region is working closely with our Headquarter's Climate change office to bring seminars and conferences to
the Region 6 states to show the value and how to convert methane to energy. As new technology develops, the Region expects that more of the smaller landfills will
be able to economically convert its methane gas to energy. Additionally, the Region is working to improve the recycling rate for waste tires in Texas and along the
US/Mexico border. In pursuit of the embracing the Resource Conversation Challenge (RCC), the Region is focusing on regulations that may create hurdles that
prevent effective reclamation and recycling. Specifically, the Region is partnering with industry and our states to increase awareness on product and process design
and materials recovery for e-wastes.
With adoption of the RCRA Tribal Strategy which addresses RCRA Subtitle C, D, and I, the Region will reduce the number of open dumps on Indian land by
increasing: 1) the number of tribes with full analysis of its municipal solid waste stream, 2) number of tribes with tribal council and tribal community approval, 3)
number of tribes with codes and rules in place, and 4) the number of open dumps properly closed. EPA, BLA, IHS, and RUS are coordinating funds through a national
solicitation to assist the tribes in these areas. The Region will provide technical assistance and guidance documents to the tribes. The Region will continue to respond
to public inquiries as received and provide the Region 6 states the opportunity to share solid waste management information among themselves and provide technical
support as requested. [The State of Arkansas cites the need to reduce hazardous waste going to landfills and corrective action assessments on landfills in
closure status as priorities. J
46
-------
Long-Term Strategic Targets
Each year through 2008, maintain the national average municipal solid waste generation rate at no more than 4.5 pounds per person per day.
• By 2008, increase recycling of the total annual municipal solid waste produced to 35 percent from 31 percent in 2002.
• By 2008, increase the number of landfills converting methane to energy from 20 to 89.
• Increase the number of solid waste management plans by 3 per year through 2008.
Increase the number of tribes with codes, ordinances, and regulations by 3 per year through FY 2008.
Increase recycling of municipal solid waste
Conversion of methane gas to energy from landfills
Work with tribes, BIA, IHS, and RUS to provide technical assistance in
evaluation waste streams, developing solid waste management plans,
developing codes and regulations and closing open dumps
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Continue to partner with Mexico, states and tribes on benefits of tire, white
goods, and e-waste recycling. The Region will conduct seminars and host
conferences on the issue with states, industry and other federal agencies.
Pursue partnerships with states, industry and other federal agencies to
promote the collection and conversion of methane gas generated from
landfills into energy. The Region will support pilot projects with states,
industry and other federal agencies in order to demonstrate the usefulness
and economic benefit of methane conversion to energy. The Region will
conduct seminars and host conferences on the issue with states, industry
and other federal agencies.
Award grants to Tribes, coordinating with BIA, IHS, and RUS, to provide
technical assistance in evaluation waste streams, developing solid waste
management plans, developing codes and regulations and closing open
dumps.
47
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Conversion of methane gas to energy
Solid waste management plans in place for Indian land
Codes, ordinances, and regulations in place for tribes
Close open dumps on tribal land
UNITS
number of landfills
number of solid waste
management plans
number of tribes with solid
waste codes, ordinances,
and regulations
open dumps
FY04 GOALS
16
3
3
10
48
-------
Projected FTE for FY 2004
Goal 3, Objective 1, Sub-objective 1
NPM
OSWER
EPM
TOTAL FTEs
APPROPRIATION
I
T
Closure
rfund
6RA
1.1
1.1
6XA
0.4
0.4
6PD
44.6
44.6
6WQ
6SF
6MD
0.5
0.5
6EN
6RC
0.5
0.5
TOTAL
47.1
47.1
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share of the
appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
1
NPM
OSWER
•
— •
_
TOTAL DOLLAH
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
•
Superfund
IS
6RA
6XA
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Cathy Carter
-------
Goal 3, Objective 1, Sub-objective 2
Goal Three: Land Preservation and Restoration
Objective 3.1: Preserve Land
Sub-Objective 3.1.2: Manage Hazardous Wastes and Petroleum Products Properly
Lead Division: 6PD
Current Condition
In Region 6 there are over 40,000 UST facilities. EPA estimates that nearly all of the facilities have the proper equipment but only about 60% of these facilities are in
operational compliance. The five Regional states are all fully authorized to implement the RCRA hazardous waste permitting program; however, the Region provides
significant resources through work share agreements to enable the States to operate effective and efficient programs.
Strategy Highlights
Currently the Region 6 states measure UST operational compliance differently. The agency has established a standardized program to measure compliance at these
facilities, and the Region will be working with the states to communicate and implement this standardized program in pursuit of determining what types of facilities
(mom and pops, mid-size, majors) are not complying and what the problems areas are. Once the Region has collected this information from the states, this
information will help the agency focus its efforts on such areas as outreach, education, installation, and/or regulatory changes.
The Region, in order to assist the states with increasing responsibilities and decreasing resources and in conjunction with other partners, have developed a computer
program that generates draft permits and permit renewals. Furthermore, the Region will continue to work with the states through Work Share Agreements and other
resources to effectively and efficiently manage their hazardous waste programs. Specifically, the Region will continue to assist the states with site-specific risk
assessments for combustion facilities in order to ensure the Region will achieve the strategic target of emission reduction of dioxins and furans, and the Region will
continue to assist the states with data quality issues (e.g. database cleanup). [The State of Texas considers the evaluation of permit applications and finalization
of permits for hazardous waste combustion facilities to be a priority. Under their proposed revised combustion strategy, each combustion facility would be
evaluated to determine the need for a site-specific risk assessment. The State of Arkansas cites compliance inspection for all USTs as a priority. The Region
will continue to respond to public inquiries as received and provide the Region 6 states the opportunity to share solid waste management information among
themselves and provide technical support as requested. The State of Arkansas cites the need to reduce waste going to landfills and corrective action
assessments on landfills in closure status as priorities. The State of Louisiana also views waste minimization programs as a top priority. Region 6 commits
to reviewing and approving state submittals in a timely and an appropriate manner.]
50
-------
Goal 3, Objective 1, Sub-objective 2
Long-Term Strategic Targets
nS "™ber °f faci™- ™* P*™* - <*- approved controls from 79
percent oy me end ol t Y 2008. The total Regional universe is approximately 475 facilities.
By 2008, update controls for preventing releases at the 143 Regional facilities that are due for permit renewal by the end of FY 2006.
i°nS °f di°XinS a"d «™» bv 90% ™> P-to*-*, matter by 50% from 1994 levels of 880
"e "^ * "" *" "
mna operational compHance with both release detection and release prevention
be aPP™mate: In 2004 TsUbHs^ ^Tf ^""r ""'T* °f aP"roXimately 40'000 fecilities' ^ baseline^ompliance rate is
vv iieiy ou /„. in f Y 2OU4 establish the baseline compliance for each state. Increase the compliance rate 4% a year through FY 2008.
Each year through 2008, minimize the number of confirmed releases at UST facilities.
manaS6ment plans bv 3 ^ y™ ^™& ™ 2008. Increase the number of tribes with codes, ordinances, and regulations
Respond to all public inquiries and help the states stay current with rules and regulations.
51
-------
Goal 3, Objective 1, Sub-objective 2
STRATEGY
Prevent releases from RCRA hazardous waste management
facilities by increasing the number of facilities with permits
or other approved controls
Update controls for preventing releases at the 143 Regional
facilities that are due for permit renewal
Reduce hazardous waste combustion facility emissions of
dioxins and furans and p articulate matter
Increase the percentage of UST facilities that are in
significant operational compliance (SOC) with both release
detection and release prevention requirements
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Awards grants and provide technical assistance to states in order to increase the number
of RCRA hazardous waste management facilities with permits or other approved controls
and to effectively and efficiently manage the RCRA hazardous waste program.
Specifically, the Region is developing a computer program that generates draft permits
which will result in a significant savings of resources for states.
Awards grants and provide technical assistance to states in order to increase the number
of RCRA hazardous waste management facilities with permits or other approved controls
and to effectively and efficiently manage the RCRA hazardous waste program.
Specifically, the Region is developing a computer program that generates draft permits
which will result in a significant savings of resources for states.
Award grants to states and partner with states and industry in order to achieve the
reduction of emissions. Work Share Agreements with states will assist states in
completing combustion site-specific risk assessment that will establish permit emission
criteria for waste combustion facilities.
Award grants to states and partner with states and industry in order to achieve SOC.
Communicate and implement this standardized program (i.e., SOC) in pursuit of
determining what types of facilities (mom and pops, mid-size, majors) are not complying
and what the problems areas are. Focus SOC efforts on such problem areas through
outreach, education, installation, and/or regulatory changes.
52
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Issuance of permits or other controls
Issuance of permit renewals
Number of VST facilities for SOC baseline
Number of facilities in SOC
UNITS
RCRA hazardous waste
management facilities
RCRA hazardous waste
management facilities
VST facilities
UST facilities
FY04 GOALS
76
72
40, 000
1600
53
-------
Goal 3, Objective 1, Sub-objective 2
Projected FTE for FY 2004
NPM
OSWER
OECA
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
6XA
0.9
0.9
6PD
3.1
3.1
6WQ
6SF
6MD
0.1
0.1
6EN
6RC
0.7
0.7
TOTAL
4.0
0.8
4.8
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share of the
appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
OSWER
OECA
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of contact: Cathy Carter
54
-------
55
-------
Goal 3, Objective 2, Sub-objective 1
Goal Three: Land Preservation and Restoration
Objective 3.2: Restore Land
Sub-objective 3.2.1: Prepare for and Respond to Accidental and Intentional Releases
Lead Division: 6SF
Current Condition
Within Region 6's boundaries are more than 75% of the United States' petrochemical capacity, 45% of the domestic crude oil production capacity, 60% of the refining
capacity, 30% of the manufacturing facilities and 30% of the total pipeline miles in the United States. On average, Region 6 receives about 6000 notifications per year
of oil and hazardous materials releases. About 1700 of these are oil spill notifications. The Region opens 100 to 115 active oil spill investigation cases annually. A
large percentage of these are appropriately addressed by the responsible party (polluter) under EPA direction. Additionally, there are typically 20-25 time critical
CERCLA funded removals per year, and about 30-35 OPA-funded EPA oil spill cleanups in which there is no responsible party activity. We clean up dozens of
releases, whether accidental, deliberate, or naturally occurring. We respond to incidents ranging from small spills at chemical or oil facilities to natural disasters.
Strategy Highlights
The removal program begins with the State. The State identifies what sites need assessment and which sites need time-critical removal. The State and EPA sign a
Removal Action Contract that provides a 10% match for the time-critical removal that can include in-kind service. Another example of State and EPA cooperation is
in Louisiana. Louisiana's clean-up standards are in some instances stricter than EPA; EPA cleans up to the federal standard and Louisiana will complete the clean-up
to its State standards either through an agency mechanism, contract, or sometimes giving EPA funds. Approximately, 20-25 time critical removals occur annually.
To accomplish these removals, it is important to have On-Scene Coordinators (OSC) that are adequately trained to not only work on removals, but also be able to deal
with multiple, large-scale emergency incidents. We will continue to develop technical personnel in the field, ensuring their readiness and protecting their health and
safety when responding to releases of dangerous materials. Part of the training of our OSCs includes table-top exercises with State and Local responders and working
with the LEPCs.
An important component of the EPA and State's land strategy is preventing oil spills from pipeline ruptures and oil storage facilities from reaching our Nation's
waters. The Oil Pollution Act requires certain facilities develop and implement spill prevention, control, and countermeasure (SPCC) plans. Compliance with the
SPCC requirements of the Oil Pollution Act reduces the potential for oil spills and the resulting detrimental effects on human health and environment. Regional
emergency preparedness and response for all hazardous materials, including radioactive materials is addressed under Goal 3,2,1. Cleanup of radioactive
sites is addressed under Goal 3,2,2. [The State of Louisiana cites the ability to respond to environmental incidents and citizens' complaints as a priority.]
56
-------
Goal 3, Objective 2, Sub-objective 1
Long-Term Strategic Targets
• National - Each year through 2008, improve the Agency's emergency preparedness by achieving and maintaining the capability to respond to simultaneous
large-scale emergencies and by increasing response readiness by 10 percent from a baseline established by the end of 2003 using the core emergency
response criteria.
Regional - By 2008, Region 6 will improve its emergency preparedness by achieving and maintaining the capability to respond to emergencies and by
increasing our response readiness by 10 percent from the 2003 baseline.
National - Each year through 2008, respond to 350 hazardous substance releases and 300 oil spills.
Regional - Each year through 2008, field response/deployment to 25-30 hazardous substance releases and 30 oil spills.
• National - Each year through 2008, minimize impacts of potential oil spills by inspecting or conducting exercises or drills at 6 percent of approximately 6000
oil storage facilities required to have Facility Response Plans. (Between FY97 and FY02, 30 percent of these facilities were inspected.)
Regional - Of the approximately 150 facilities per year that the Region currently inspects, 53% are compliant with the SPCC requirements. By 2008, we
propose for the compliance rate to reach 65%.
57
-------
Goal 3, Objective 2, Sub-objective 1
STRATEGY
Work with our partners to improve emergency response readiness
Respond to Emergency releases and oil spills
Achieve compliance with Oil Pollution Act
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Participating in various emergency response exercises with State and Local
programs.
Additional training for On-Scene Coordinators.
Improved response time for START.
Participating in various emergency response exercises with State and Local
programs.
Additional training for On-Scene Coordinators.
Improved response time for START.
Provide training to oil facilities on the development of SPCCs.
Conduct follow-up inspections of oil facilities.
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Number of removal starts
Number of SPCC inspections
Number of removal contracts
UNITS
numerical
numerical
numerical
FY04 GOALS
16
180
16
58
-------
Goal 3, Objective 2, Sub-objective 1
Projected FTE for FY 2004
NPM
OSWER
OECA
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
OIL
Base Closure
Superfund
OIL
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
0.1
0.1
6XA
0.2
0.4
0.6
6PD
0.2
0.2
6WQ
6SF
0.6
19.5
7.8
27.36
6MD
0.4
5.0
5.4
6EN
6RC
0.3
0.2
0.5
TOTAL
1.5
25.4
7.8
34.7
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share of the
appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
OSWER
OECA
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
OIL
Base Closure
Superfund
OIL
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Ragan Broyles
59
-------
Goal 3, Objective 2, Sub-objective 2
Coal Three: Land Preservation and Restoration
Objective 3.2: Restore Land
Sub-Objective 3.2.2: Clean Up and Reuse Contaminated Land
Lead Divisions: 6PD/6SF
Current Condition
The Region 6 Superfund Program has 118 sites that are either proposed, final, or deleted from the NPL which is about 7.5% of the national total. RCRA has identified
186 high risk hazardous waste facilities requiring assessment. Contaminated land poses a risk to human health and the environment. Leaching contaminates can foul
drinking water in underground aquifers used for wells or surface waters used by public 'water intakes. Contaminated soil can result in human ingestion or dermal
absorption of harmful substances. Contamination can also impact subsistence resources, including resources subject to special protections due to treaties between
federal and tribal governments. Furthermore, because of the risks it poses, contaminated land may not be available for use.
Strategic Highlights
Region 6 and its State and Tribal Partners will work to preserve and restore the land using the most effective waste management and cleanup methods available. The
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, or Superfund) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
provide the legal authority for most of EPA's work toward this goal. The Region has developed streamlining and innovative approaches for the implementation of the
RCRA programs for our states: Corrective Action Strategy and Ready for Reuse. With the development of the Corrective Action Strategy, the Regions provided the
states an opportunity to take full advantage of the flexibilities inherent to the RCRA corrective action program and to demonstrate that the program can be
administratively streamlined. Furthermore, by issuing a Ready for Reuse determination, the states are able to recognizing a milestone during the corrective action
process where use of property is protective for human health and the environment prior to all corrective action obligations having been satisfied.
Additionally, the Region and its partners use Superfund authority to clean up uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites and return the land to productive use.
Under RCRA, the Region works in partnership with states and tribes by providing grants, Work Share Agreements or provide regional contractor assistance to address
risks associated with leaking underground storage tanks (LUSTs) and with the generation and management of hazardous and nonhazardous wastes. The Region will
work under the One Cleanup Program approach with our State and Tribal partners to identify and use a variety of other State/Tribal or Federal authority to controlling
the many risks posed by accidental and intentional releases of harmful substances. [The States of Texas, Arkansas and Louisiana view the identification,
assessment, and clean up of contaminated sites as priorities. The State of New Mexico cites the clean-up of ground water at the North Railroad Avenue
Plume Superfund Site in Espanola as a priority. New Mexico would also like to establish a fund that would be used to address ground water clean-up issues.
Additionally, the State of New Mexico hopes to settle its Corrective Action Order with Los Alamos National Laboratory to ensure clean-up at the facility.)
60
-------
Long-Term Strategic Targets
^ and make 4,837 fmal assessment decisions
tio f °m ^ Domination to at or below health-based levels for
of the Region's 1 09 SuperfuTd humar Exposure ^ ^^ ( } °f *" Regi°n'S RCRA baSeli"e fadlities and 84 Percen
or natura! processes at 80 percent (149,
uj t-cn^ciu (jo) or me Region s 84 Superfund ground-water exposure sites.
r*"* (aPPr°Ximately 56) °f RCRA baseline facilities -d aPproxlmately
By 2008, deanup and reduce the baddog of approximately iO.OOO leakmg UST (LUST) S1tes by 50 percent.
tr ^l ^^^^ ^ «f RCRA baseline facilit.es and approximately 72
61
-------
Goal 3, Objective 2, Sub-objective 2
STRATEGY
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Work with our State and Tribal partners
• to perform health and environmentally based site
assessments and make final assessment decisions under
Superfund, and assess the Region's 186 RCRA baseline
facilities
• to control all identified unacceptable human exposures
from site contamination to at or below health-based
levels for current land and/or ground-water use
conditions the Region's RCRA baseline facilities and
Superfund human exposure sites
• to control the migration of contaminated ground water
through engineered remedies or natural processes at
the Region's RCRA baseline facilities and Superfund
groundwater exposure sites
• to select final remedies at the Region's RCRA baseline
facilities and Superfund sites
• to identify releases of petroleum product from LUSTs,
evaluate risks based on exposure, and cleanup to
appropriate levels
• to complete construction of select final remedies at the
Region's RCRA baseline facilities and Superfund sites
Award grants to States and Tribes, use Regional contract
support, and/or take enforcement actions when appropriate to
perform site assessments/investigations to determine if
unacceptable human exposures exist and/or if contaminated
groundwater is migrating. Select and construct response
actions to address unacceptable exposures. Partner with
States, Tribes and industry to understand the importance of
implementing this strategy.
62
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Number of Site Assessments
Number of Final Assessment Decisions
Number of sites with human exposure under control
Number of sites with ground water migration under control
Number of cleanups completed
Number of final remedies selected
Number of remedy construction completions
UNITS
RCRA baseline facilities
and Superfund sites
RCRA baseline facilities
and Superfund sites
RCRA baseline facilities
and Superfund sites
RCRA baseline facilities
and Superfund sites
LUST sites
RCRA baseline facilities
and Superfund sites
RCRA baseline facilities
and Superfund sites
FY04 GOALS
RCRA- 15
Superfund - 50
RCRA - 15
Superfund - 20
RCRA - 17
RCRA- 10
1626
Superfund - 7
Superfund - 6
63
-------
Goal 3, Objective 2, Sub-objective 2
Projected FTE for FY 2004
NPM
OSWER
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
0.2
0.3
0.5
6XA
1.2
0.1
1.3
2.6
6PD
23.2
3.2
6.3
0.6
59.7
6WQ
0.1
0.1
6SF
51.8
51.8
6MD
0.1
0.2
16.6
16.9
6EN
10.6
10.6
6RC
0.2
0.6
0.7
1.5
TOTAL
35.5
3.5
6.9
71.4
117.3
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share of the
appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
OSWER
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-directlon: None
Point of Contact: Cathy Carter
64
-------
65
-------
Goal 3, Objective 2, Sub-objective 3
Goal Three: Land Preservation and Restoration
Objective 3.2: Restore Land
Sub-objective 3.2.3: Maximize Potentially Responsible Party Participation at Superfund Sites
Lead Division: 6SF
Current Condition
Contaminated land poses a risk to human health and the environment. Leaching contaminates can foul drinking water in underground aquifers used for wells or
surface waters used by public water intakes. Contaminated soil can result in human ingestion or dermal absorption of harmful substances. Contamination can also
impact subsistence resources, including resources subject to special protections due to treaties between federal and tribal governments. Furthermore, because of the
risks it poses, contaminated land may not be available for use. The Region 6 Superfund Program has 118 sites that are either proposed, final, or deleted from the NPL
which is about 7.5% of the national total. The Region uses enforcement actions to require responsible parties to address the risks associated with these contaminated
sites. Where a viable responsible party is not available, EPA uses federal dollars to address the site. Recently, there has been an increased demand on the Superfund
budget due to large complex cleanup projects. To maximize cleanup activities and minimize the impact on the Superfund budget, enforcement activities are a priority.
The States support these enforcement efforts because it ensures that the polluter is taking responsibility for the cleanup and federally funded cleanups require a 10%
State match.
Strategy Highlights
Enforcement authorities play a critical role in all Agency clean-up programs. However, enforcement authorities have an additional and unique role under the
Superfund program, where they are used to leverage private-party resources to conduct a majority of the clean-up actions and to reimburse the federal government for
cleanups financed by the Trust Fund. We will support the national strategy of "Enforcement First" as well as cost recovery under Superfund. This "Enforcement
First" strategy will allow EPA to focus limited Trust Fund resources on sites where viable, potentially responsible parties either do not exist or lack funds or
capabilities needed to conduct cleanup. Cost Recovery is another way to leverage private-party resources through enforcement. [The State of Arkansas believes
better coordination between EPA and the State is needed on cost recovery efforts. Additionally, Arkansas desires training on conducting PRP searches.]
66
-------
Long-Term Strategic Targets
Goal 3, Objective 2, Sub-objective 3
Each year through 2008, reach a settlement or take an enforcement action before the start of a remedial action at 90 percent of
Superfund sites having viable, liable responsible parties other than the federal government.
Each year through 2008, address all Statute of Limitations cases for Superfund sites with unaddressed total past costs equal to or
greater than $200,000.
Working with our partners, maximize Responsible Party
participation through "Enforcement First"
Working with our partners, maximize cost recovery efforts to
payback monies spent to conduct cleanup activities.
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Conduct frequent, routine dialog with removal and site
assessment programs internally, and State and Tribal
program externally, to identify sites and conduct PRP
searches as early as possible.
Provide notice to liable and viable parties upon
identification.
Engage in settlement negotiations with liable and viable
parties.
Monitor milestones to ensure all Statute of Limitations are
timely addressed.
Prepare referrals that are thorough, accurate, and timely.
Support negotiations and litigation by settlement or
judgement.
67
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Reach a settlement or take an enforcement action before the start of a remedial action at 90
percent of Superfund sites having viable, liable responsible parties other than the federal
government.
Address all Statute of Limitations cases for Superfund sites with unaddressed total past costs
equal to or greater than $200,000.
UNITS
Remedial
Action Starts
Cases
FY 04 GOALS
90%
16
68
-------
Projected FTE for FY 2004
Goal 3, Objective 2, Sub-objective 3
6SF
[| TOTAL FTE
Projected Dollars for FY 2004
6MD
6EN
6RC
15.5
TOTAL
64.0
t r r 20°4 appropriation -u
,ll not be known until February/March 2004.)
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Buddy Parr
'Q
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
69
-------
Goal 4, Objective 1, Sub-objective 1
Goal Four: Health Communities and Ecosystems
Objective 4.1: Chemical, Organism, & Pesticide Risks
Sub-objective 4.1.1: Reduce Exposure to Toxic Pesticides
Lead Division: 6PD
Current Condition
Anyone can be at risk to the exposure of pesticides use whether it be at home, school, or work. Those that are particularly vulnerable to pesticide exposure are
'workers that apply pesticides. Pesticide use also effects fauna, watersheds, and agricultural communities. EPA Region 6, EPA Headquarters and State Pesticide
Agencies work to prevent and reduce risks from pesticides. EPA Region 6 does this through cooperative agreements with state agencies that regulate pesticides. We
negotiate annual work plans with these state agencies. The annual work plans include activities to prevent and reduce risks from pesticides. Twice a year we evaluate
State progress in implementing the cooperative agreement. Prevention and reduction of pesticide risks is a priority for both EPA and State Pesticide Agencies.
Region 6 also participates in the National Strategic Agricultural Initiative for Pesticides. The Strategic Agriculture Initiative Program is working to demonstrate and
facilitate the adoption of farm management decisions and practices that provide growers with a "reasonable transition" away from high-risk pesticides.
Strategy Highlights
Region 6 will continue to work with EPA Headquarters and States to develop and implement strategies which prevent and reduce risks from pesticides. We will
ensure that each Region 6 state has a comprehensive pesticide program that addresses:
• worker protection and training
• protection of water resources
• protection of endangered species
The Region will encourage use of innovative voluntary measures, such as promoting the use of reduced-risk pesticides and integrated pest management. The Region
will conduct outreach to pesticide users. We will establish partnerships with the agricultural community. We will also focus our efforts to reduce risks to migrant
workers and minority/low income populations.
70
-------
Goal 4, Objective 1, Sub-objective 1
Long-Term Strategic Targets
• Ensure that each State has and is maintaining a comprehensive pesticide management program that is protective of human health
and the environment.
• The Strategic Agriculture Initiative Program will have partnerships with 1) agricultural agencies for developing Pest Management
Strategic Plans (PMSPs) and 2) agronomic and horticultural commodity groups to determine needs for improved and innovative
PMSPs..
STRATEGY
Region 6 will work closely with States/Tribes to administer a
comprehensive pesticide management program that is protective
of human health and the environment.
Region 6 will build partnerships with State Cooperative Extension
Services and Commodity Groups.
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Meetings between Region 6 and States to discuss pesticide
management issues.
Bi-annual evaluations of state pesticide management programs.
Annual negotiation of cooperative agreement commitments with
states.
Participation in meetings with targeted groups, and provide annual
funding of two projects.
71
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Number of Annual Evaluations of State Pesticide Programs.
Develop Cooperative Agreements with States that demonstrate and
facilitate the adoption of farm management decisions.
UNITS
State Mid-year
reports/evaluations
State End-of-year
reports/evaluations
Agreements
FY04 GOALS
5
5
2
72
-------
Goal 4, Objective 1, Sub-objective 1
Projected FTE for FY 2004
NPM
OPPTS
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
6XA
6PD
9.3
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
9.3
9.3
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share of the
appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
OSWER
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
(SEN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact : Carl Young, (214) 665-6645
73
-------
Goal 4, Objective 1, Sub-objective 3
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
Objective 1: Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide Risks
Sub-objective 3: Reduce Chemical and Biological Risk ( Lead and Asbestos)
Lead Division: 6PD
Current Condition
Children under the age of 6 are most vulnerable to lead exposure. In Region 6, Lead possess a problem among the communities along the border, in and around
Superfund Sites and environmental justice communities including within the tribes. The States of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Texas and the Cherokee
Nation have approved Lead programs and received funding from the Region to implement their programs. The Region is responsible for implementing the Lead
program in the State of New Mexico and on Tribal lands excluding the Cherokee Nation.
The States of Texas, Oklahoma and Louisiana have applied and receive a waiver of the Federal Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA; Asbestos
Containing Materials in Schools, 40 CFR Part 763, Subpart E) "Asbestos in Schools rule". The States of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas have approved
Model Accrediation Plan (MAP) by which they are responsible regulating the training and accrediation of asbestos professionals. The Region is responsible for the
implementation of the asbestos program in New Mexico and for the ensuring that Asbestos in Schools rule is followed in Arkansas.
Strategy Highlights
Educate the Real Estate community about the disclosure regulations. Inform renovation and remodeling contractors of their responsibilities in conducting lead
abatement activities. The Region will continue to conduct outreach to homeowners on ways to minimize exposure to lead hazards. The Regional Lead program will
continue to work with the States on the implementation of their Lead programs, will assist the state of New Mexico in the development and implementation of their
program and will assist Arkansas in revising their Lead Hazards Standards program. The Regional Asbestos program will continue to educate school officials and
homeowners on ways to minimize exposure to asbestos containing materials in homes and schools.
-------
Goal 4, Objective 1, Sub-objective 3
Long-Term Strategic Targets
By 2008, reduce the number of children exposed to lead hazards by 20%
By 2008, have approved programs in all 5 states and the Cherokee Nation.
Decrease the number of school children exposed to asbestos containing materials in schools.
STRATEGY
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Assist the States/Locals/Tribes in their development and
implementation of their Lead Programs.
Through 2008, continue efforts to support the tribal set-aside
grant program for implementation of blood level screening
and lead awareness activities in Indian Country.
Assist the States/Locals/Tribes in their development and
implementation of their Asbestos Programs.
Provide funding through the State Tribal Assistance Grant
program.
Provide technical assistance to States and Tribes
implementing the programs.
Continue and encourage cooperative assistance agreements
and oversight with tribes to conduct blood lead screening and
lead awareness activities.
Negotiate, process, and manage grants that produce high
quality, results-oriented methods to reduce children's
exposure to lead paint and asbestos.
75
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
UNITS
FY04 GOALS
Number of Training providers
accredited
Number of individuals certified to
conduct lead abatement activities
Number of firms certified to conduct
lead abatement activities
Number of State and Tribal Programs
implementing EPA Lead Paint
Program
providers accredited
individuals certified
firms certified
States & Tribes approved
40
2000
350
5 States and Cherokee Nation
76
-------
Projected FTE for FY 2004
Goal 4, Objective 1, Sub-objective 3
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA^willnot receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share of the
appropnation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Monica Smith
-------
Goal 4, Objective 1, Sub-objective 4
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
Objective 1: Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide Risks
Sub-objective 4.1.4: Reduce Risks at Facilities
Lead Division: 6SF
Current Condition
Within Region 6's boundaries are more than 75% of the United States' petrochemical capacity, 45% of the domestic crude oil production capacity, 60% of the refining
capacity, 30% of the manufacturing facilities and 30% of the total pipeline miles in the United States. On average Region 6 receives about 6000 release notifications
per year. Because of this high capacity, Region 6 has 520 active Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs). Our work with these facilities and the LEPCs
through our various preventative programs is beginning to yield a reduction in the amount of chemicals released.
Strategy Highlights
In order to accomplish Facility Risk Reduction, EPA Region 6 utilizes several prevention programs including EPCRA, SPCC, and the Risk Management Plan (RMP).
Our strategy has several components including working with the States, LEPCs, inspections, and training.
The States approve the LEPCs plans "which include the incorporation of facility risk information. Region 6 LEPCs are in 100% compliance with the requirement to
incorporate facility risk information into their emergency preparedness and community right-to-know programs. The States review these plans on an annual basis
through the State Emergency Offices. LEPCs are required to review and exercise these plans on annual basis. Region 6 participates in about 20 of these exercises a
year. In addition, Region 6 and the States work together to re-energize LEPCs as needed and meets with 20 to 30 LEPCs per year.
Region 6 is also the only Region that hosts an annual Local Emergency Planning Committee meeting in order to provide training to the LEPCs.
Another part of our strategy includes inspecting RMP facilities. During the inspections at the RMP facilities, we review the RMPs and compare the plans to what's
being done at the facility to reduce risk. By June, 2004, revised RMPs will be due. Through the efforts of all three of our prevention programs (EPCRA, SPCC and
RMP), we have been able to incorporate Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) for LEPCs. To date, Region 6 has had $2.5 million in SEPs to LEPCs that
have funded equipment and training. 50% of all Region 6 enforcement actions are generated through the RMP, SPCC, and EPCRA programs.
In addition to preventative programs. Region 6 has developed in conjunction with Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and the University of Texas
at Dallas (UTD), the E-Plan system which helps LEPCs and local fire departments mitigate hazardous releases in a timely manner. The E-Plan system provides real-
time access for fire departments to the RMPs. Currently, EPA Region 6 has an employee detailed to UTD. States and Locals that are now utilizing E-Plan include the
State of Arkansas; Piano, Texas; Corpus Christi, Texas; Frisco, Texas; Allen, Texas; and McKinney, Texas. The following areas will begin utilizing E-Plan during
FY04: Houston, Texas; Orange County, Texas; El Paso, Texas; Richardson, Texas; and Iberville Parish, Louisiana.
78
-------
Long-Term Strategic Targets
By 2010, 30% of Region 6 facilities with hazardous chemicals including RMP facilities will have reduced their risk of having a
major chemical accident.
By 2010, 50% of local communities or LEPCs will have incorporated facility risk information into their emergency preparedness
and community right-to-know programs.
STRATEGY
Work with RMP facilities
to reduce their risk.
Work with LEPCs to continue to incorporate emergency
information.
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
• Conduct inspections of facilities
• Provide training to facilities
• Outreach to facilities
• Review RMPs
• Work with LEPCs to build consistency and capabilities
• Provide training through the annual LEPC meeting
Attend LEPC exercises
79
-------
Goal 4, Objective 1, Sub-objective 4
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
EPCRA 312 Inspections
RMP Inspections
CERCLA 103 Inspections
Attend LEPC exercises
UNITS
numerical
numerical
numerical
numerical
FY04 GOALS
80
80
40
20
80
-------
Goal 4, Objective 1, Sub-objective 4
Projected FTE for FY 2004
NPM
OSWER
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
6XA
0.4
0.4
6PD
0.1
0.1
6WQ
6SF
3.8
3.8
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
4.3
4.3
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share of the
appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
OW&
OPPTS*
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Ragan Broyles
81
-------
Goal 4, Objective 2, Sub-objective 2
Goal Four: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
Objective 2: Communities
Sub-objective 4.2.2: Restore Community Health
Lead Division: 6RA
Current Condition
Region 6 is home to approximately 60% of petro-chemical manufacturing facilities in the nation. Approximately 40% of the nation's hazardous waste is generated in
Region 6 and 45% of that waste ,s ultimately deposited in the Region Current U.S. Census Bureau figures indicate dramatic growth in minorityTd low!tacome
populations is Texas, Louisiana and New Mexico. Minority and low income communities in these "fenceline" locations bear the brunt of enviroL,en alimp^cte from
nearby industrial neighbors. With its unique geographic location and the concentration of petroleum and chemical manufacturing, hazardous w^SenSon
treatment and disposal facilities, the Reg,on faces umque challenges ,n addressing the health, pollution, and regulatory issues that accompany tee c^dMo™'
Strategy Highlights
Long-Term Strategic Targets
• By 2008, assist all five states in Region 6 to develop EJ Programs consistent with our Region's EJ Program.
• By 2006, train 70% of all EPA employees in EJ Fundamentals Training.
By 2006, assist all five states in Region 6 in conducting at least one EJ Listening Session per state.
82
-------
Goal 4, Objective 2, Sub-objective 2
STRATEGY
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Promote collaborative, community-based, problem solving
thru the use of external, multi-stakeholder partnerships,.
Continue collaborative work with community-based
organizations such as the Southwest Network for
Economic and Environmental Justice (SNEEJ) and
Louisiana Environmental Action Network (LEAN) to
address EJ concerns.
Encourage the use of EPA/State partnerships to
implement EJ Listening Sessions in LA, TX & NM.
Empower EJ communities, enhance public
participation and environmental awareness by
providing financial & technical assistance.
Provide financial assistance through the EJ Small Grant
Program and special discretionary funding.
Address EJ issues through EJ training. Hold EJ training
for external stakeholders as requested.
-------
Improve community access to state and federal
information.
Work with communities to improve access by
providing information electronically or at no
cost.
Provide effective public notice. Traditional
"public notice" is expanded to include non-
traditional means of communication, i.e.,
community bulletin boards, minority and special
interest media, and faith-based communities.
Use flexibility in extending public comment
periods and setting meeting times and locations.
Encourage States to address EJ concerns.
Encourage States to address the issues of
environmental justice.
84
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Provide financial and/or technical assistance to EJ
communities
EJ Listening Sessions
Partnership meetings attended (new or existing)
UNITS
Communities
Sessions
Meetings
FY04 GOALS
5
1
3
85
-------
Projected FTE for FY 2004
Goal 4, Objective 2, Sub-objective 2
NPM
OA
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
6XA
0.4
0.4
6PD
0.7
0.7
6WQ
6SF
6MD
1.1
1.1
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
2.2
2.2
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share
of the appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
OSWER
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
SEN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Olivia Balandran
86
-------
-------
Goal 4, Objective 2, Sub-objective 3
Goal Four: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
Objective 4.2: Communities
Sub-objective 4.2.3: Assess and Cleanup Brownfields
Lead Division: 6SF
Current Condition
Thousands of properties in Region 6 have been abandoned or underused due to possible contamination from previous industrial, mining-related, or
other uses. These properties are called "Brownfields." These Brownfields negatively impact the community due to the possible environmental risk.
In addition, these sites drain the vitality of the local economy. Because lenders, investors, and developers fear that involvementwith these sites may
make them liable for cleaning up contamination they did not create, they are more attracted to developing sites in pristine areas, called "greenfields."
The result can be blighted areas rife with abandoned industrial or commercial facilities that create safety and health risks for residents, drive up
unemployment, and foster a sense of hopelessness. Brownfields sites rob communities and neighborhoods of the opportunity to share in the nation's
economic progress.
Strategy Highlights
Building a community's capability to make decisions that affect the environment is at the heart of the community-centered work of this Sub-
Objective. The Brownfields Program addresses an important community development issue: the thousands of properties that have been abandoned
or underused due to possible contamination from previous industrial, mining-related, or other uses. We will help build this community capability by
the authorities outlined under the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2002. Specifically, working with our co-
implementors (States/Tribes), we will provide assessment, cleanup, revolving loan fund, and job training grants to communities. Through partnering
and assistance, we will help communities identify and overcome the various barriers to the cleanup and reuse of brownfields sites and the restoration
of contaminated land and buildings back into productive use. We will also provide assistance and grants to States and Tribes to establish and
enhance State/Tribal Response Programs. The State/Tribal Response Programs provide communities with critical elements of a protective and
successful brownfields reuse project, including site cleanup standards, cleanup oversight and approval, and liability exemptions. In addition,
through direct technical assistance and through grants to the States/Tribes, we will provide communities with environmental assessments on
brownfields. [The States of Texas, Arkansas and Louisiana agree that the environmental assessment and development of Brownfields are
priorities.]
88
-------
Goal 4, Objective 2, Sub-objective 3
Long-Term Strategic Targets
,^ °ur s^ ^ tribal partners, assess and promote the
Work with our co-implementors to get
abandoned properties back into economic use.
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Award grants to States/Tribes to support their
cleanup programs as well as issue grants to local
entities to assess and cleanup sites, as well as,
provide job training to the local community.
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Number of Brownfields Assessments
Number of Jobs Created
Amount of Private dollars leveraged
UNITS
Sites
Jobs
Dollars
FY04
GOALS
30
100
25M
89
-------
Projected FTE for FY 2004
Goal 4, Objective 2, Sub-objective 3
NPM
OSWER
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
6XA
6PD
0.2
0.2
6WQ
6SF
9.7
9.7
6MD
0.1
0.1
6EN
0.4
0.4
6RC
TOTAL
10.4
10.4
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share
of the appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
OSWER
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Betty Williamson
90
-------
91
-------
Goal 4, Objective 2, Sub-objective 4
Goal Four: Healthy Communities & Ecosystems
Objective 2: Communities
Sub-objective 4: Sustain and Restore U.S.-Mexico Border Ecosystems
Lead Division: 6PD
Current Condition
Ninety percent of the US/Mexico border population resides in 14 paired, inter-dependent sister cities. Over the last 20 years, population has grown
rapidly in the border region to more than 11.8 million people and is expected to reach 19.4 million by 2020. Rapid population growth in urban areas
has resulted in unplanned development, greater demand for land and energy, increased traffic congestion, increased waste generation, overburdened
or unavailable waste treatment and disposal facilities, and more frequent chemical emergencies. Residents in rural areas suffer from exposure to
airborne dust, pesticide use and inadequate water supply and waste treatment facilities. Border residents also suffer disproportionately from many
environmental health problems, including water-borne diseases and respiratory problems.
Strategy Highlights
Region 6 and its partners are working along the Mexican Border to reduce transboundary threats to human and ecosystem health in North America.
The Border 2012 Program identifies six program goals and several objectives that meet the serious environmental and environmentally-related
public health challenges in the border region. These goals and objectives focus on reduction of water contamination; reduction of air pollution;
reduction of land contamination; improvement of environmental health; reduction of exposure to chemicals as a result of accidental chemical
releases and/or acts of terrorism; and improvement of environmental performance through compliance, enforcement, pollution prevention, and
promotion of environmental stewardship.
Six of those US/Mexico border states (2 in the United States and 4 in Mexico) are in Region 6. Four regional workgroups, co-chaired by EPA and
state officials, six border-wide workgroups, and three Policy Forums will collaborate with local communities to set priorities and plan and
implement projects. These groups will also assist in establishing objectives, defining indicators, and measuring progress. The allocation of
resources to activities will be based on the degree to which each project achieves the goals and objectives outlined in the Border 2012 Plan.
Region 6 will actively support the focus of Border 2012 to improve water quality in the Region and will focus on other environmental and human
health issues such as risks posed by pesticides.
92
-------
Goal 4, Objective 2, Sub-objective 4
Long-Term Strategic Targets
By 2012, promote a 25 percent increase in the number of homes connected to potable water supply and wastewater collection and treatment
systems along the New Mexico and Texas border.
• By 2012, assess significant shared and transboundary surface waters and achieve a majority of water quality standard currently being
exceeded along the New Mexico/Texas border.
• By 2006, implement a monitoring system for evaluating Gulf of Mexico coastal water quality.
• By 2007, all Region 6 border cities will attain national ambient air quality standards, and reduce exposure in the border region.
• By 2005, Region 6 joint contingency plans for all sister cities will be in place and operating (including exercises).
* By 2007, reduce pesticides exposure by training farmworkers on pesticide risks and safe handling, including ways to minimize exposure for
families and children.
STRATEGY
Working binatiorially to develop
Implementation Plan for all Workgroups.
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
All Implementation Plans are being developed
with our Program partners which include
border states (Texas and New Mexico and
Mexican counterparts), federal agencies and
Tribes.
93
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Number of Sister City Plans
established
US/Mexico agreement on Border
2012
Environmental Indicators for the
Border Program
UNITS
Plans
Agreement
Group of
Indicators
FY04 GOALS
12 Sister Cities
1
1
94
-------
Projected FTE for FY 2004
Goal 4, Objective 2, Sub-objective 4
OIA
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTE
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will
6XA
6PD
5.0
5.0
6WQ
0.5
0.5
6SF
0.5
0.5
6MD
0.4
0.4
6EN
6RC
0.5
0.5
TOTAL
6.9
6.9
not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share
of the appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Gina Weber
SRA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
95
-------
Goal 4, Objective 3, Sub-objective 1
Goal Four: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
Objective 4.3: Ecosystems
Sub-objective 4.3.1 Protect and Restore Ecosystems
Lead Division: 6WQ
Current Condition
Region 6 is home to three estuaries in the National Estuary Program (NEP), the Galveston Bay NEP, the Coastal Bend Bays NEP and the Barataria
Terrebonne NEP. The Coastal Bend Bays estuary is located in a semi-arid region and is subject to the growing needs of a large city. In addition to
a lack of rainfall, water from rivers and streams that would otherwise flow to the estuary is diverted for residential, industrial, and agricultural uses.
The lack of fresh water mixing with sea water causes pollutants to concentrate in the estuary and contributes to losses of oysters and white shrimp.
Subsidence, development and shoreline erosion have contributed to the highest priority problem in the Galveston Bay estuary - loss of habitat. The
Galveston Bay Program is working with its partners to incorporate innovative methods for oyster reef and wetland construction with the goal of
habitat enhancement and shoreline erosion protection. The challenge of the Barataria Terrebonne Estuary Program is to move forward as good
stewards of the natural resources that remain within the estuary complex, where sediment loss, in conjunction with the natural sinking of the marsh,
is by far, the most significant problem. Sea-level rise and erosion also contribute to the problem, as can human activities, such as canal dredging and
construction of navigation channels. Several of the approximately 735 species of birds, finfish, shellfish, reptiles, amphibians, and mammals who
spend all or part of their life cycle in the estuary are categorized as either threatened or endangered.
Strategy Highlights
Region 6 will work to protect, sustain and restore the health of natural habitats and ecosystems by identifying and evaluating problem areas,
developing tools and improving community capacity to address problems. We will work to restore and protect 3 estuaries in the Region (Barrataria-
Terrebonne, Galveston Bay and Coastal Bend Bays) that are part of the National Estuary Program (NEP) through the implementation of
comprehensive conservation and management plans (CCMPs). (The State of Texas believes that this goal should also address non-coastal
ecosystems. The State of Texas also disagrees with the use of NCCR measurements and believes that state-specific measurements would be
more appropriate.] The Region will participate in the Texas Environmental Resource Stewards Partnerships to protect ecosystems
associated with major federal construction projects in Texas.
96
-------
Goal 4, Objective 3, Sub-objective 1
Long-Term Strategy
• By 2008, improve the overall aquatic system health of the three estuaries that are part of the NEP, compared to 2006, as measured using the
National Coastal Condition Report and NEP indicators.
• By 2008, working with NEP partners, protect or restore additional acres of habitat within the study area for the three Region 6 estuaries
in the NEP.
STRATEGY
Assist Region 6 NEPs (Barrataria-Terrebonne,
Coastal Bend Bays and Galveston Bay) in their
efforts to restore and protect estuaries.
Use the grant mechanism to promote community
efforts to expand and improve existing
watershed measures through technical
assistance, training and tool development.
Work with Gulf of Mexico Program on
assessment and restoration projects affecting
estuarine ecosystems.
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS I
Review and evaluate comprehensive
conservation and management plans.
Provide technical assistance, tools and training
to Region 6 NEPs charged to restore, sustain
and protect critical habitats.
Negotiate, process and manage grants that
produce high quality results-oriented methods
to restore, sustain and protect three estuaries in
Region 6 that are part of the NEP.
Use post-award monitoring and NEP guidance
to ensure the most efficient and effective use of
federal funds.
Participate actively in Gulf of Mexico Program's
Policy Review and Management Committee.
Promote better partnerships with State and
other stakeholders.
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Acres of habitat restored and protected
regionwide as part of the National Estuary
Program
UNITS
Acres
FY04 GOALS
1665
98
-------
Goal 4, Objective 3, Sub-objective 1
NPM
ow
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
6RA
0.1
6XA
6PD
6WQ
4.7
6SF
6MD
1.5
6EN
6RC
0.3
0.3
TOTAL
6.6
6.6
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share
of the appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
OW
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Phil Bellinger
99
-------
Goal 4, Objective 3, Sub-objective 2
Goal Four: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
Objective 4.3: Ecosystems
Sub-objective 4.3.2 Increase Wetlands
Lead Division: 6WQ
Current Condition
Continuing pressures along the upper Texas coast (navigation, groundwater withdrawal) and the effects of past pressures (oil and gas production,
impoundments) are resulting in significant wetlands loss. Coastal wetland losses, in Louisiana alone, are 25 square miles per year. The projected
costs to the nation of this wetlands loss is estimated at more than $100 billion in infrastructure alone.
Strategy Highlights
Region 6 will maintain active participation on the CWPPRA Taskforce to achieve a reduction in the rate of coastal wetland loss and enhance our
partnership with the U.S. Army Coips of Engineers Districts to achieve no net loss of non-coastal wetlands. We will assist the Louisiana
Department of Natural Resources and the Governor's Office with activities related to the Louisiana Coastal Area Study. We will work with our
partners to achieve a no net loss in wetlands acres and we will seek gains in wetland acreage where possible. [The state of Louisiana views
coastal wetland loss as a priority. Most states agree that nutrient reduction is a priority wetlands issue.]
Long-Term Strategic Targets
• Annually, beginning in FY2004, work with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE)and other partners to achieve no net loss of wetlands
under §404 of the Clean Water Act regulatory program.
• By 2006, and each year thereafter, work with COE and other partners to obtain no net loss in wetland function based on quantifying
functions gained and lost through mitigation for authorized wetlands impacts.
100
-------
Goal 4, Objective 3, Sub-objective 2
STRATEGY
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Support wetlands and stream corridor
restoration and management and assessment of
overall wetland health.
Negotiate, process and manage grants that
produce high-quality, results-oriented methods
to restore wetlands and stream corridors.
Conduct effective pre-award cost evaluations
and technical review of grant proposals to
achieve desired results.
Use post-award monitoring to ensure the most
effective and efficient use of federal funds.
Target wetland grants to increase wetland acres
and maintain support of NEPs and the Gulf of
Mexico Program.
Negotiate, process and manage grants that
produce high-quality, results-oriented methods
to increase wetland acres.
Conduct effective pre-award cost evaluations
and technical review of grant proposals to
achieve desired results.
Use post-award monitoring to ensure the most
effective and efficient use of federal funds.
Work with Louisiana Department of Natural
Resources and other, federal, partners in
Louisiana Coastal Area Study activities and
advocate the use of river re-introductions,
barrier island restoration and use of innovative
technologies to restore coastal Louisiana.
Use CWPPRA funds, partnerships and
processes to reduce the rate of wetland loss in
coastal Louisiana.
Increase the number of habitat-area units
through EPA-sponsored CWPPRA projects.
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Watershed-based wetlands restoration
projects to which Region 6 has provided
financial assistance and/or has
contributed significant technical
assistance.
Number of major tasks completed by
States/Tribes that significantly improve
the effectiveness of compensatory
mitigation.
Number of major tasks completed by
States or Tribes that significantly
improve ability to report the wetland
condition for their State/Tribe.
UNITS
Projects
Tasks
Tasks
FY04 GOALS
44 cumulative (3 in FY04)
2 cumulative (1 new in FY04)
2 cumulative ( 1 new in FY04)
102
-------
Goal 4, Objective 3, Sub-objective 2
Projected FTE for FY 2004
NPM
OW
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6WQ
12.7
6SF
6MD
0.1
6EN
6RC
0.3
13.1
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share
of the appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
OW
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Phil Dellinger
103
-------
Goal 5, Objective 1, Sub-objective 1
Goal Five: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
Objective 5.1: Improve Compliance
Sub-objective 5.1.1: Compliance Assistance
Lead Division: 6EN
Current Condition
Region 6 represents a diverse set of industry and environmental issues. Through the regulatory programs that are already in place, Region 6, in
cooperation with the Region 6 States and environmental partners, will continue to maintain a strong and effective compliance assurance and
enforcement program. We account for approximately 56% of the Oil Refinery capacity in the U.S., 95% of the Ethylene production, 70% of the
Primary Petrochemical production, and 31% of the Crude Oil production. We have over 25% of the Nation's oil pipelines and over 300,000
facilities (over 30% of national facilities) subject to Oil Pollution Act (OP A) regulations. RCRA facilities in this Region generate 40% of the solid
waste in the Nation. The Region also contains 20% of the wetlands acreage in the contiguous United States. These emissions and discharge issues
are addressed through the regulatory permitting process.
Strategy Highlights
Compliance Assistance is an essential component of the Region 6 Integrated Compliance Strategy. Using a problem-based approach, we will
provide compliance assistance to aid the regulated community in understanding and meeting its environmental obligations as well as help other
providers aid the regulated community in complying with the regulations. Assistance may also help entities go beyond compliance. The
Compliance Assistance Coordinator will serve as the focal point for planning and coordination of compliance assistance efforts, including
establishing mechanisms for measuring the results of these activities. We will promote the use of the Compliance Assistance Centers and use the
various compliance assistance tools (Hotlines, Workshops/Training, Presentations/Meetings, Development of Tools, Distribution of Outreach
Materials, On-site Visits, and Environmental Management Reviews). We will continues to partner with State and local governments and trade
associations to collaborate on activities that address national and regional priorities. [The States of Texas and Louisiana note that the
incorporation of compliance assistance as a core function is a priority. The State of Oklahoma believes that there should be a federal focus
on tribal lands relative to the RCRA program and permit evaders. Oklahoma also notes that additional information and training are
needed to ensure that small communities are compliant with the new requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act.The State of Arkansas
believes that compliance assistance is a priority, especially in the agricultural sector.] The Region will work with the States to strengthen tribal
capacities with respect to RCRA programs and improve compliance among regulated entities on tribal lands through inspections, outreach, and
enforcement.
Long-Term Strategic Targets
• Compliance Assistance: By 2008, prevent noncompliance or reduce environmental risks through EPA compliance assistance by
achieving: a 5 percentage point increase in the percentage of regulated entities that improve their understanding of environmental
requirements; a 5 percent increase in the number of regulated entities that improve environmental management practices; a 5 percentage
point increase in the percent of regulated entities that reduce, treat, or eliminate pollution. (Baseline to be determined for 2005).
104
-------
Goal 5, Objective 1, Sub-objective 1
STRATEGY
As part of an integrated strategy, enforcement and compliance
initiatives will include compliance assistance, compliance
incentives, and enforcement. We will evaluate each Sector to
determine if compliance assistance should be a component of
that sector's strategy and we will work closely with our State
partners to provide Compliance Assistance to the regulated
community. We will continue to promote the use of the
various Compliance Assistance Centers.
Based on discussions with the States, Region 6 will
concentrate our efforts in the following areas - for all States
except where noted as State specific:
Resource Conservation Recovery Act
RCRA Financial Assurance
RCRA Permit Evaders
RCRA Ports of Entry Initiative
US/Mexico
Clean Air Act
CAA - Coal-fired Utilities and Pulp/Paper
Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act
Oil and Gas Outreach Efforts
CAFO Outreach Efforts in Oklahoma and New Mexico
Septic Haulers in Arkansas and New Mexico
Capacity, Management, Operations, and Maintenance
Program in Oklahoma
Concrete Batch Plant Initiative in Oklahoma
Calcasieu and Ouachita Water Quality Basins Watersheds in
Louisiana
Storm Water Construction General Permit (Phase II) (TCEQ
initiative}
Public Water Supply Facilities
Public Water Supply Nitrate Contamination in Oklahoma
and Texas
Core Programs
TSCA Outreach for Lead-based paint, AHERA and PCBs
FIFRA Workshops and Seminars
EPCRA 313 TRI Training courses and Compliance
Assistance Visits
Oil Pollution Act Spill Prevention Control and
Countermeasure Workshops
ios~
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Percentage of regulated entities seeking assistance from EPA-
sponsored compliance assistance centers and clearinghouse
reporting that they improved environmental management
practices as a result of their use of the centers or the
clearinghouse.
Percentage of regulated entities receiving direct compliance
assistance from EPA (e.g. training, on-site visits) reporting
that they improved environmental management practices as
a result of EPA assistance.
Percentage of regulated entities seeking assistance from EPA-
sponsored compliance assistance centers and clearinghouse
reporting that they reduced, treated, or eliminated pollution
as a result of their use of the centers or the clearinghouse.
Percentage of regulated entities seeking assistance from EPA-
sponsored compliance assistance centers and clearinghouse
reporting that they increased their understanding of
environmental requirements as a result of their use of the
centers or the clearinghouse.
Percentage of regulated entities receiving direct compliance
assistance from EPA (e.g., training, on-site visitis) reporting
that they increased their understanding of environmental
requirements as a result of EPA assistance.
Percentage of regulated entities receiving direct assistance
from EPA (e.g., training on-site visits) reporting that they
reduced, treated, or eliminated pollution, as a result of EPA
assistance.
UNITS
% of regulated entities
% of regulated entities
% of regulated entities
% of regulated entities
% or regulated entities
% of regulated entities
FY04
GOALS
60%
50%
25%
75%
65%
25%
106
-------
Projected FTE for FY 2004
Goal 5, Objective 1, Sub-objective 1
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriat.cn until January 2004. The Region 6 share
ot the appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Bonnie RomoAValter Biggins
-------
Goal 5, Objective 1, Sub-objective 2
Goal Five: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
Objective 5.1: Improve Compliance
Sub-objective 5.1.2: Compliance Incentives
Lead Division: 6EN
Current Condition
Region 6 represents a diverse set of industry and environmental issues. Through the regulatory programs that are already in place. Region 6, in
cooperation with the Region 6 States and environmental partners, will continue to maintain a strong and effective compliance assurance and
enforcement program. We account for approximately 56% of the Oil Refinery capacity in the U.S., 95% of the Ethylene production, 70% of the
Primary Petrochemical production, and 31% of the Crude Oil production. We have over 25% of the Nation's oil pipelines and over 300,000
facilities (over 30% of national facilities) subject to Oil Pollution Act (OP A) regulations. RCRA facilities in this Region generate 40% of the solid
waste in the Nation. The Region also contains 20% of the wetlands acreage in the contiguous United States. These emissions and discharge issues
are addressed through the regulatory permitting process.
EPA offers a suite of incentives to encourage government, industry, and business facilities to assess their overall compliance with environmental
requirements and voluntarily correct and report compliance problems. Incentives include reduced penalties for violations, extended time for
correction, and potentially fewer or less frequent inspections. Since FY2000, close to 150 Region 6 facilities have voluntarily disclosed violations at
their facilities.
Strategy Highlights
Region 6 fully supports the use of the Audit Policy and Small Business Policy to encourage government, industry, and business facilities to
voluntarily disclose violations. Region 6 has established an Audit Policy Coordinator, who will be responsible for tracking the submittal and
processing of self-disclosures. The Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) will be used to record the receipt of the disclosures and
determination information. We will strive to improve the identification of small businesses in ICIS. Inspectors have been instructed to inquire about
the facilities small business status during the inspection process, so that this information can be entered into ICIS for tracking small business
activities. [The utilization of compliance incentives is a priority for the State of Texas.]
Long-Term Strategic Targets
• Compliance Incentives: By 2008, identify and correct noncompliance and reduce environmental risks through a 5 percentage point
increase in the percentage of facilities that use EPA incentive policies to conduct environmental audits or other actions that reduce, treat, or
eliminate pollution or improve environmental management practices. (Baseline to be determined for 2005)
108
-------
Goal 5, Objective 1, Sub-objective 2
STRATEGY
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
The Audit Policy and Small Business Policy will be used to
encourage government, industry., and business facilities to
voluntarily disclose violations. The Region will strive to
improve the identification of small businesses in ICIS.
Inspectors will inquire about the facilities small business
status during the inspection process so that this
information can be entered into ICIS for tracking small
business activities. The Integrated Compliance
Information System (ICIS) will be used to record the
receipt of the disclosures and determination information.
In additional to the supporting the core Audit Policy and
Small Business Policy programs, the region will also be
focusing our efforts in the following areas:
RCRA Financial Assurance
RCRA Ports of Entry initiative
CWA New Mexico Dairy Producers program to train self-
auditors
EPCRA - Implement a Regional Feed and Fertilizer
initiative.
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Percentage of audits or other actions that result in the
reduction, treatment, or elimination of pollutants; or
the protection of populations or ecosystems.
Percentage of audits or other actions that result in
improvements in environmental management practices.
Pounds of pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated, as
a result of audit agreements or other actions.
Dollars invested in improving environmental
management practices as a result of audit agreements or
other actions.
UNITS
% of audits or
other actions
% of audits or
other actions
Pounds of
pollutants
Dollars invested
FY04 GOALS
5%
10%
Regional portion of
0,25 million pounds
national goal
Region portion of $2
million national goal
109
-------
Goal 5, Objective 1, Sub-objective 2
Projected FTE for FY 2004
NPM
OECA
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
6XA
0.3
0.3
6PD
03
0.3
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
3.4
3.4
6RC
1.0
1.0
TOTAL
5.0
5.0
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share
of the appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
OECA
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: David Bond/Walter Biggins
110
-------
Ill
-------
Goal 5, Objective 1, Sub-objective 3
Goal Five: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
Objective 5.1: Improve Compliance
Sub-Objective 5.1.3: Monitoring and Enforcement
Lead Division: 6EN
Current Condition
Region 6 represents a diverse set of industry and environmental issues. Through the regulatory programs that are already in place, Region 6, in
cooperation with the Region 6 States and environmental partners, will continue to maintain a strong and effective compliance assurance and
enforcement program. We account for approximately 56% of the Oil Refinery capacity in the U.S., 95% of the Ethylene production, 70% of the
Primary Petrochemical production, and 31% of the Crude Oil production. We have over 25% of the Nation's oil pipelines and over 300,000
facilities (over 30% of national facilities) subject to Oil Pollution Act (OP A) regulations. RCRA facilities in this Region generate 40% of the solid
waste in the Nation. The Region also contains 20% of the wetlands acreage in the contiguous United States. These emissions and discharge issues
are addressed through the regulatory permitting process.
Strategy Highlights
Through smart enforcement and performance monitoring, we will determine root causes and baseline noncompliance issues. Region 6 will work
with the States in our targeting and coordination of EPA inspections and enforcement actions, to ensure the efficient utilization of State and Federal
resources. State capacity building is an essential function of EPA. To further that mission, we will work with the States to provide the necessary
training so that States can run an effective program, including conducting joint inspection as training opportunities. We will continue to conduct
annual planning meetings to discuss priorities, accomplishments, partnership opportunities, and coordination of activities. Supplemental
Environmental Projects will be explored during all settlement negotiations to secure significant environmental or public health protection
improvements beyond those achieved by bringing the facility into compliance.
Core programs will be maintained to ensure an EPA presence. This includes the Air, Water, and Hazardous Waste programs, as well as Toxic
Substance Control Act (TSCA), Wetlands, Pesticides, Underground Storage Tanks, Oil Pollution Act, and the Emergency Planning and Community
Right to Know Act (EPCRA). Any deviations, if needed, from Core requirements will be discussed with OECA, through our yearly planning
process. Region 6 will use the Facility Watch List as a tool to increase our use of data in decision-making and to ensure timely and appropriate
enforcement responses are taken by either EPA or the states to address instances of significant noncompliance. Region 6 will continue to conduct
program assessments of authorized State programs. Joint efforts with the States will continue to address areas of concern found during reviews of
State programs. Joint inspections will be negotiated with each State, as appropriate. [The States of Texas, New Mexico, Louisiana ,and
Oklahoma agree that increased compliance by the regulated community through the use of inspections, compliance assistance, and
enforcement actions is a priority. The State of Oklahoma concurs and also cites the need for additional training, funding, better
coordination and prioritization of inspections, and the need for a more consistent approach to enforcement activities among Region 6
states. Oklahoma also sees a need for more federal focus on tribal lands relative to RCRA and permit evaders. The State of Mexico also
cited the need for training related to environmental crimes.]
Long-Term Strategic Targets
percentage of enforcement actions requiring improvement of environmental management practices. (Baseline to be determined for 2005).
112
-------
Goal 5, Objective 1, Sub-objective 3
STRATEGY
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Monitoring and
Enforcement are key
components of an
integrated strategy.
Region 6 will coordinate
with the States, all
scheduled inspections.
The Expedited Settlement
Agreement approach will
lie utilized to streamline
resolution of commonly
occurring violations, for
appropriate programs.
Region 6 will continue to
stress the use of SEPs as
part of our enforcement
actions.
Region 6 will continue to
conduct program
assessments of authorized
State programs. Joint
efforts with the States will
continue to address areas
of concern found during
reviews of State programs.
Joint inspections will be
negotiated with each
State, as appropriate.
Based on discussions with the States, Region 6 will focus our efforts in the following
program areas:
Resource Conservation Recovery Act
Financial Assurance
Permit Evaders
Ports of Entry initiative - Joint efforts with the States of New Mexico and Texas
Clean Air Act
Petroleum Refineries
Chemical Industry
NSR/PSD Compliance for Coal-fired Utilities and Pulp/Paper Industry
MACT Standards Compliance for Refining, Oil and Gas Sectors, and Chemical Industry-
Wood Finishing MACT standards in Arkansas
Air Emissions from Animal Feeding Operations in Oklahoma
Emissions from Startup, Shutdown, Maintenance, and Malfunction events at major
industrial facilities in Texas.
Clean Water Act
National Priority Wet Weather Discharges - SSOs
Septic Haulers in Arkansas and New Mexico
Sand and Gravel Mining Initiative in New Mexico
Storm Water Construction General Permit
CIU In Non-pretreatment Cities
Unauthorized Discharges, Overflow, and Bypasses in Arkansas and Louisiana
NPDES enforcement program on Indian lands in Oklahoma
CAFO Requirements with Oklahoma and New Mexico
NPDES Requirement Controlling Oil and Gas Exploration and Production in Oklahoma,
Texas, and New Mexico
Safe Drinking Water Act
UIC Programs On Indian Lands
Public Water Supply Microbial Rules and enforcement of the new Public Water Supply
rules
Homeland Securiry/Bio-Terrorism Act requirements
Public Water Supply program in Indian Country
Public Water Supply Nitrate Contamination in Oklahoma and Texas
Maintain Core Programs
Texas (TCEQ) initiative to link information in the Consolidated Compliance and
Enforcement Data System (CCEDS) to wet weather discharges to develop the State of
Texas SSO baseline.
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Pounds of pollution estimated to be
reduced, treated, or eliminated as result of
concluded enforcement actions.
Percentage of concluded enforcement
cases (including SEPs) requiring that
pollutants be reduced, treated, or
eliminated and protection of populations
or ecosystems.
Percentage of concluded enforcement
cases (including SEPs) requiring
implementation of improved
environmental management practices.
Number of inspections, civil
investigations, and criminal investigations
conducted in areas that: pose risks to
human health or the environment, display
patterns of non-compliance, or include
disproportionately exposed populations or
ecosystems.
Percentage of regulated entities taking
complying actions, as a result of
compliance monitoring.
Dollars invested in improved
environmental performance or improved
environmental management practices as
result of concluded enforcement actions
(i.e., injunctive relief and Supplemental
Environmental Projects).
UNITS
Pounds of Pollutants
% of cases
% of cases
# inspection
# civil investigations
# criminal investigations
# of regulated entities
Dollars invested
FY04 GOALS
Regional portion of 300
million National target
30%
60%
Regional portion of 18,500
National goal
10%
Regional portion of $4
million National goal
114
-------
Projected FTE for FY 2004
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
Goal 5, Objective 1, Sub-objective 3
6XA
6PD
4.7
4.7
6WQ
4.2
4.2
6SF
2.2
2.2
6MD
3.3
3.3
6EN
115.6
115.6
6RC
35.6
35.6
TOTAL
166.9
166.9
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will
not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share
OECA
of the appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.
^APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Contact: Walter Biggins/Connie Overbay
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
-------
Goal 5, Objective 2, Sub-objective 1
Goal Five: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
Objective 5.2 Improve Environmental Performance through Pollution Prevention and Innovation
Sub-objective 5.2.1 Prevent Pollution and Promote Environmental Stewardship by Government and the Public
Lead Division: 6EN
Current Condition
Environmental Management Systems are relatively recent but accepted management tools developed to ensure that consideration of an organization's
environmental priorities and interest are institutionalized into operations and planning processes.
Region 6 conducts and prepares environmental impact reviews and assessments under NEPA for identification and possible modification of
significant impacts associated with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits under the Clean Water Act for non-delegated
states or programs, EPA sponsored or led projects such as the Colonia Wastewater Treatment Assistance Program and Border Environmental
Infrastructure Fund, as well as grant actions for Congressional Special Appropriation projects. Non-delegated NPDES permit actions would
include: all new source categories in New Mexico, Confined Animal Feeding Operations sites in Oklahoma, oil and gas operations in Oklahoma and
Texas, as well as those in areas that can not be delegated such as tribal or federal lands, including the territorial seas and outer continental shelf of
the Gulf of Mexico.
Strategy Highlights
Region 6 will provide Environmental Management Systems training and networking opportunities to federal facility staff and managers in the Region.
We will continue to provide technical assistance through Environmental Management Reviews.
Region 6 will conduct environmental reviews for EPA led construction projects under the Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act
and decisions such as designation of dredge material sites. Also, EPA has a mandated responsibility to review the environmental assessment documents
developed by other Federal agencies for actions considered to be "major Federal actions" under NEPA. The scope of these actions range from a couple
of acres associated with the construction of a new Federal building or customs check-point to the 1000+ miles of new highway construction for Interstate
69 in Texas.
Long-Term Strategic Targets
• Through 2008, reduce pollution and improve environmental stewardship practices of all levels of government. Demonstrate how government
agencies can serve as stewards of the environment and assist them in meeting their responsibilities under the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA). Raise the public's awareness of actions it can take to prevent pollution.
116
-------
Goal 5, Objective 2, Sub-objective 1
STRATEGY
SUPPORTING PROCESSES
The Region will promote the development of EMS's at
Federal Facilities consistent with Executive Order No.
13148 through providing technical assistance and
conducting Environmental Management Reviews (EMR).
On-site assessments (EMR).
Conduct and prepare environmental impact reviews and
assessments under NEPA for identification and possible
modification of significant impacts associated with
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits under the Clean Water Act for non-
delegated states or programs, EPA sponsored or led
projects such as the Colonia Wastewater Treatment
Assistance Program and Border Environmental
Infrastructure Fund, as well as grant actions for
Congressional Special Appropriation projects. Non-
delegated NPDES permit actions would include: all new
source categories in New Mexico, Confined Animal
Feeding Operations sites in Oklahoma, oil and gas
operations in Oklahoma and Texas, as well as those in
areas that can not be delegated such as tribal or federal
lands, including the territorial seas and outer continental
shelf of the Gulf of Mexico.
In order to leverage limited resources and provide better
results in less time, Region 6erented the Geographic
Information System Screening Tool (GISST). GISST is
used as a screening tool to help focus NEPA reviews (by
EPA and other Federal agencies), evaluate ecological,
human health, and socio-economic issues and insure that
the environmental reviews are comprehensive in nature,
but targeted at natural and historic resources of concern.
The GISST approach has also allowed EPA to analyze
multiple projects and consider cumulative and secondary
impacts in a discrete geographic area. The environmental
reviews would include cross-cutting programs such as
threatened and endangered species, historic sites and
cultural resources, designated flood plain and wetland
resources and compliance with Tribal preservation and
Environmental Justice (EJ) principle.
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE
MEASURES
By 2006, reduce Toxic Release
Inventory reported toxic
chemical releases at federal
facilities by 40 percent
(baseline year of 2001).
By 2008, 70 percent of
significant impacts identified
by EPA during the NEPA
review of all major proposed
federal actions are mitigated.
By 2008, 90 percent of EPA
projects subject to NEPA
Environmental Assessment or
Environmental Impact
Statement requirements result
in a finding of no significant
environmental impact.
UNITS
% releases at
Federal Facilities
% of federal
agencies
% of EPA projects
FY04 GOALS
40%
70%
90%
118
-------
Projected FTE for FY 2004
Goal 5, Objective 2, Sub-objective 1
Projected DoHars for py 2004 ( ^ py ^ ^^ ^ ^ ^
°* the aPPropnation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
APPROPRIATION
.)
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Points of Contact: Gabriel Gruta (Federal Facilities), Hector Pena (NEPA)
-------
Goal 5, Objective 2, Sub-objective 2
Goal Five: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
Objective 5.2: Improve Environmental Performance through Pollution Prevention and Innovation
Sub-objective 5.2.2: Prevent Pollution and promote Environmental Stewardship by Business
Lead Division: 6EN
Current Condition
Region 6 represents a diverse set of industry and environmental issues. Through the regulatory programs that are already in place, Region 6, in
cooperation with the Region 6 States and environmental partners, will continue to maintain a strong and effective compliance assurance and
enforcement program. We account for approximately 56% of the Oil Refinery capacity in the U.S., 95% of the Ethylene production, 70% of the
Primary Petrochemical production, and 31% of the Crude Oil production. We have over 25% of the Nation's oil pipelines and over 300,000
facilities (over 30% of national facilities) subject to Oil Pollution Act (OP A) regulations. RCRA facilities in this Region generate 40% of the solid
waste in the Nation. The Region also contains 20% of the wetlands acreage in the contiguous United States. These emissions and discharge issues
are addressed through the regulatory permitting process.
Pollution prevention provides capacity building in a sustainable manner to small, medium and large facilities; local and state government and
municipalities as well as partnerships between academia and industry.
Strategy Highlights
Pollution Prevention is a fundamental building block in the Region 6 Integrated Compliance Strategy. Using a preventative approach, we will
provide capacity building, training and technical assistance to aid the regulated community reduce their regulatory exposure through pollution
pliance assistance
vernments, academia
siana agree that
is a priority.]
Long-Term Strategic Target
• Through 2008, reduce pollution and improve environmental stewardship practices in business operations by adopting more efficient,
sustainable, and protective policies, practices, materials and technologies.
120
-------
Goal 5, Objective 2, Sub-objective 2
STRATEGY
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Region 6 will promote pollution prevention and
resource conservation to the regulated community as
the preferred method for preventing and/or resolving
compliance problems. Although the role of inspectors
will continue to be evaluation of compliance with
environmental statutes and the enforcement of those
statutes, inspectors will be trained through NETI, ORD,
or university sources to identify pollution prevention
opportunities and will make referrals for pollution
prevention assistance. The enforcement strategy will
include promoting environmental compliance through
pollution prevention initiatives (i.e. exceeding
requirements). Supplemental Environmental Projects
with a pollution prevention component will be given
high priority during settlement negotiations.
Tools will include training of inspectors so they can make
P2 referrals. Also promote P2 initiatives and P2 SEPs.
Region 6 will promote pollution prevention and
resource conservation to the regulated community by
awarding grant funds through a competitive process
under the authority of the Pollution Prevention Act of
1990.
Grants.
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
By 2008, reduce by 40 percent TRI
chemical releases to the environment
from the business sector per unit of
production ("Clean Index") and
reduce by 20 percent TRI chemicals
in production-related wastes
generated by the business sector per
unit of production ("Green Index").
Baseline year of 2001.
By 2008, reduce waste minimization
priority list chemicals in hazardous
waste streams reported by businesses
to TRI by SO percent from 1991
levels.
By 2008, reduce pollution by 76
billion pounds, conserve 360 billion
BTUs of energy and 2.7 billion
gallons of water, and save $400
By 2008, reduce 165 thousand metric
tons of carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions through the Green
Chemistry Challenge Awards, from
baseline year of 1996.
UNITS
% TRI Releases from
business sector
% chemicals
Founds of pollution
reductions
BTUs of energy
Gallons of Water
Dollars saved
Metric Tons of CO2
FY04 GOALS
20 % Green Index
50%
National goal
•asures for this sub-objective (5.2.2) are tentative. We have echoed the performance measures identified in the National
^ur understanding that these are still being discussed and will probably change prior to the flnalization of the Strategic
plans.
122
-------
Projected FTE for FY 2004
Goal 5, Objective 2, Sub-objective 2
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share
of the appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contacts: Joy Campbell and Eli Martine
-------
Goal 5, Objective 2, Sub-objective 3
Goal Five: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
Objective 5.2 Improve Environmental Performance through Pollution Prevention and Innovation
Sub-objective 5.2.3 Business and Community Innovation
Lead Division: 6EN
Current Condition
Region 6 is working with all sectors of government, at all levels: Federal, State, Tribal and Municipal and industry to find new and innovative ways
to address issues in environmental protection at these various entities. One of the tools being stressed in many of the new programs is
Environmental Management Systems (EMS), as a way to encourage sustained compliance and continuous improvement.
Strategy Highlights
Under the National Environmental Performance Track program the Region has added new members in every application cycle; currently there are
39 Performance Track members in Region 6. Region 6 was the first Region to sign an MOA with a state (Texas) to facilitate simultaneous
membership in both the Federal and State programs to achieve even greater environmental benefits. [The use of innovative methods, like
Environmental Management Systems, is a priority for the State of Texas.]
Long-Term Strategic Target
Through 2008, achieve measurably improved environmental performance through sector-based approaches, performance-based programs,
and assistance to small business.
STRATEGY
National Environmental Performance Track Program:
Region will promote the development and implementation
of Environmental Management Systems (EMS) consistent
with the Agency's EMS Policy. EMS's are a key criteria
for participation in the National Environmental
Performance Track program.
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Environmental Management Systems (EMS).
124
-------
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
UNITS
FY04 GOALS
By 2008, Performance Track members
collectively will achieve an annual
reduction of: 1.5 billion gallons in water
use; 3,300,000 MMBTUs in energy use;
25,000 tons in materials use; 450,000 tons
of solid waste; 10,000 tons of air releases;
and 19,000 tons in water discharges
compared to 2001.
Gallons in water use
MMBTUs in energy
use
Tons in materials use
Tons of solid waste
Tons of air releases
Tons in Water
Discharges
Regional portion of Nationa
Goals
125
-------
Goal 5, Objective 2, Sub-objective 3
Projected FTE for FY 2004
OA
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
0.2
0.2
6XA
1.2
1.2
6PD
0.1
0.1
6WQ
6SF
0.1
0.1
6MD
0.9
0.9
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
2.5
2 5
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share
of the appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
OA
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Craig Weeks
126
-------
-------
Goal 5, Objective 2, Sub-objective 4
Goal Five: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
Objective S.2: Improve Environmental Performance through Pollution Prevention and Innovation
Sub-objective 5.2.4: Environmental Policy Innovation
Lead Division: 6EN
Current Condition
The Region is working with all levels of government, industry and other groups to find new ways to address issues on a broad scale and looking to
changes old policies that were written to address issues of another time and find new ones to address the issues of today. The Region is even
looking at policies to improve the way we, as a Region, work to make things more efficient.
Strategy Highlights
The emphasis on innovation within the Region has opened lines of communication internally that have not been previously been open It has
allowed the different divisions or working groups in the Region to see the good things their fellow employees are doing.
Long-Term Strategic Targets
Through 2008, achieve measurably improved environmental and economic outcomes by testing, evaluating, and applying alternative
approaches to environmental protection in states, companies, and communities. This work will be targeted at improving the cost
effectiveness and efficiency for regulatory agencies as well as regulated entities.
STRATEGY
Region 6 is developing an innovation strategy to cultivate
innovations within the Region. The goal is to break down
the barriers to innovation that have stymied many
programs and projects through the years.
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Region 6 Innovation Strategy.
128
-------
Goal 5, Objective 2, Sub-objective 4
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
UNITS
FY04 GOALS
By 2008, facilities that partner to demonstrate
alternative regulatory or technological approaches
will collectively achieve an environmental
improvement of 10 percent in water use, energy
use, waste generation or disposal, air releases, or
water discharges, or an increase of 10 percent in
cost effectiveness or efficiency while achieving
equal or improved environmental results.
(Improved environmental performance from
alternative approaches will be measured against
the baseline year in which each project in
initiated)
% improvements
% in cost effectiveness or
efficiency
10%
10%
By 2008, state projects conducted under the State
Innovation Grant Program, Environmental
Results Program, and the Joint EPA/State
Agreement to Pursue Regulatory Innovation will
collectively achieve an environmental
improvement of 15 percent in water and energy
use, waste generation or disposal, releases of
contaminants into the air or water, or habitat
quality, or an increase of 15 percent in cost
effectiveness or efficiency while achieving equal or
improved environmental results. (Improved
environmental performance from alternative
approaches will be measured against the baseline
year in which each project ins initiated)
% improvements
% in cost effectiveness or
efficiency
15%
15%
-------
Goal 5, Objective 2, Sub-objective 4
Projected FTE for FY 2004
NPM
OSWER
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004 The Region 6 share
of the appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
OSWER
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: David Bond/Craig Weeks
130
-------
-------
Goal 5, Objective 3
Goal Five: Compliance & Environmental Stewardship
Objective 3: Build Tribal Capacity
Sub-objective: None
Lead Division: 6RA
d±0" Region 6 Indian county is categorized into three areas as listed below. This analysis is based upon EPA's interna,
assessment of all program areas:
i r ,-,,,-*„•,> Thcaualitv of the drinking water provided by the 66 tribal public water supply systems
Drinking Water/Wastewater System ^^^.^S^^^^L of 92»/o compliance. Currently, approximately 67% of the tribal
(PWSSs) in New ^^^^^^^^^ Many of4e tribal systems are obsolete and over-loaded, causing major
population is dnnkmg water that meets a l^alth base Mescalero Apache Tribe drinking water sources identified contamination attributed to
problems and health concerns^ ^Bactenaj anaLys purchases water from the El Indio Water Supply which has experienced numerous
3e^tySv^ation]: ^X violations occur, the Kickapoo residents need to boil water before consumption.
^ Historically the clean-up of solid waste has been a priority with over 50% of the sixty-six tribes in Region 6. More
Tribal Solid Waste Clean-up - His'onca"y- 'Country Illegal dumping can pose risks to human health and contribute to degradation of au-, water
than 600 open dumps are '^^«^^^atBiD8I>ega^L and other chemicals that may leach into ground water. Furthermore, many
and land resources. Unconfrolled open dumps ca ^ materials such as appliances, automobiles, and t.res. Current funding
,ribes lack an ^^^^l ^limited demonstration program for a tribal solid waste infrastructure, and do not allow the EPA
^adequately address the issue and seek long-term solutions.
,r- A m Tl r nresent formula developed by the American Indian Environmental Office (AIEO) of $ 1 1 0,000, per tribe
General Assistance Program (GAP) - ^P^5^™ a minimal funding level per tribe. According to the present formula, $7,260,000 is needed
,o build capacity is inadequate. CuiTendy Region 6 , a^ a ^^ ^^ cQst rf Hvin& ^ $, 1Q;000 funding ]eve) ^ not provlde
annually. With the tribal governments ut.l^mg large m ^ itKrease to provide effective environmental protection.
an adequate environmental presence. 1 he OAf lunumg
capacity building as a top priority.] 132
-------
Goal 5, Objective 3
Long-Term Strategic Targets
By 2008, increase the number of tribes that have environmental program capacity to 95%.
By 2008, increase the number of tribes with environmental monitoring and assessment activities under EPA approved quality assurance
procedures by 20%.
By 2008, increase direct implementation of environmental programs to 60% of tribes as determined by program delegations, approvals, or
primacies issued to tribes and direct implementation activities by EPA.
By 2008, increase the number of tribes with multi-media programs reflecting program integration by 10%.
STRATEGY
Region 6 will increase the number of tribes awarded
grants under the GAP program to develop environmental
capacity.
Region 6 will monitor water quality and solid waste
disposal on tribal lands.
Region 6 will address Direct Implementation in Indian
country.
SUPPORTING PROCESSES AND ACTIONS
Through tribal outreach and consultation, ensure that
tribes are aware of opportunities available under the GAP
program. Encourage tribes to apply and compete for
grants.
Region 6 will provide grants for targeted projects. We
will conduct training and workshops, utilize site visits,
inspections, sampling, work plans, financial summaries;
quality assurance project plans to monitor and assess
improvements in water quality and clean up efforts.
Region 6 will work with tribes to help them build capacity
via the GAP program to obtain program authorizations.
-------
Goal 5, Objective 3
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Number of tribes receiving GAP grants.
Percent of tribes with monitoring and
assessment activities underway.
Percent of tribes with Direct
Implementation Authority.
UNITS
Grants
Percent
Percent
FY04 GOALS
All 66 tribes should receive GAP grants.
Region 6 will increase the number of tribes
with environmental monitoring and
assessment activities under EPA approved
quality assurance procedures by 5% each
fiscal year.
Region 6 will increase the number of tribes
with direct implementation authority by 12
% each fiscal year.
134
-------
Projected FTE for FY 2004
Goal 5, Objective 3
NPM
OSWER
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
6.0
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
0.1
6EN
RC
6.1
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share
of the appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
NPM
OSWER
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Annette Barnard
135
-------
Goal 5, Objective 4, Sub-objective 1
Goal Five: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
Objective 5.4: Enhance Science and Research
Sub-objective 5.4.1: Strengthening Science
Lead Division: 6EN
Current Condition
EPA is working to strengthen the science that it needs to make sound dec
Strategy Highlights
We will participate in Regional and National activities to guide the focus on the highest priority environmental science and engineering needs to
ass.st Region 6 in its mission of protecting human health and the environment. We will provide review and oversight of the Peer RevipwPhr
implementation process and the Science Inventory update in Region 6 to ensure adherence to the Policy [The use of sound science in m k"
decisions about protecting health and the environment is a priority for the State of Texas.] We will expand our Science program by including
more involvement of the Regional staff and more emphasis on the Regional Science Council's role in Region 6 The Region aimsto nro t
culture where scientific excellence exists and science collaboration and communication activities are highly effective Our future efforts inHnH
soliciting input from the States regarding 3 to 5 areas in each state where additional science is needed. We plan to partner with the Office of
Research and Development to fill any gaps where needed. Many states cited science, the distribution of knowledge and commiinirati™ =,«
priorities. Many states cited the use of sound science as a priority. iui"i,auon as
Long-Term Strategic Targets
Through 2008 strengthen the scientific evidence and research supporting environmental policies and decisions on compliance pollution
prevention, and environmental stewardship. K «"»•=, j~uuuun
136
-------
Goal 5, Objective 4, Sub-objective 1
STRATEGIES
We will participate on Science Advisory Committees of academic
research, technology transfer and training centers in Region 6 to
guide the focus on the highest priority environmental science and
engineering needs to assist Region 6 in its mission of protectine
human health and the environment.
We will provide review and oversight of the Peer Review Policy
implementation process and the Science Inventory update in
Region 6 to ensure adherence to the Policy. The peer review is an
ongoing effort to use peer review to enhance the quality and
credibility of Agency decisions and enforcement actions
TOOLS/PROGRAMS
This is accomplished by working with ORD
scientists, Region 6 scientists, university
researchers, state scientists, other Federal
agencies, and private partners.
Peer reviews.
Annual Performance Measures
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Regional participation on Science Advisory
Committees
Regional participation in Peer Review and
Oversight
UNITS
FY04 GOALS
Level of Regional
participation.
Level of Regional
completeness/thoroughness
of Database.
-------
Projected FTE for FY 2004
Goal 5, Objective 4, Sub-objective 1
NPM
OW
APPROPRIATION
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL FTEs
6RA
6XA
6PD
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Projected Dollars for FY 2004 (EPA will not receive its FY 2004 appropriation until January 2004. The Region 6 share
of the appropriation will not be known until February/March 2004.)
ow
EPM
LUST
Base Closure
Superfund
TOTAL DOLLARS
6WQ
6SF
6MD
6EN
6RC
TOTAL
Proposed Resource/Re-direction: None
Point of Contact: Norm Dyer
138
-------
SECTION IV
CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES
-------
Environmental Information Strategy
Background
EPA's cross-cutting environmental information strategy is to enhance environmental results through the improved use of quality environmental information by
EPA decision makers, states, tribes, other partners and the public. EPA develops, collects, analyzes and provides access to information. Information is made
available for developing policies and priorities and for decision making regarding environmental issues. Information must be accessible by all partners. The
necessary infrastructure must be built and maintained to support secure, reliable access to information. Analytical tools to effectively use the information must
also be developed.
New ways of conducting business are required to meet more complex information challenges, particularly the challenge of working effectively with many
partners. To achieve EPA's mission, the information strategy will focus on three major areas:
1. Improve analytic capacity by providing access to tools that facilitate data interpretation and respond to environmental problems.
2. Improve governance by adopting an Agency-wide approach to managing information and information related investments.
3. Improve service delivery by working with partners to improve the effectiveness of environmental information systems.
Current Condition in Region 6
Ensuring data quality has been the primary regional emphasis to date. Data stewards in Region 6 work closely with national system owners and EPA partners to
improve and maintain the quality of Agency data holdings. In addition to supporting national automated systems, the Region contributes products to the public
access web server. A process is in place that permits the regulated community and the public in general to challenge the accuracy of EPA published information
with the goal of improving the overall data quality. The Region 6 Quality Assurance Program is very active, providing training to states and tribes each year.
Quality action plans are required for all grants involving environmental information. All Region 6 states have now been awarded One Stop Grants that encourage
and facilitate development of automated, integrated environmental information management systems. (The States of Arkansas and Louisiana cite the need to
expand electronic reporting as a priority.] The States of Arkansas and Texas cited the need for electronic permit applications capabilities as a priority.
Planned Strategies to Improve Program
An Agency-wide solution is required in order to support the integrated environmental information systems essential for the success of the program. Region 6 will
actively support all initiatives of the EPA's Chief Information Officer. The Facility Registry System (FRS), data quality guidelines, and the National
Environmental Information Exchange Network are examples of major initiatives of EPA's Office of Environmental Information receiving emphasis and support
at the regional office level. The regions have taken the lead in the area of Geographic Information Systems (GIS), working in collaboration to improve and share
GIS offerings.
-------
Long Term Strategic Goals
Chienai!fomatfoPnCDffi'cte0rrnanagin8 environmental '"formation is essential, the Region's long range goals must be the same as the Agency goals set by the EPA
Improved use of environmental information to strengthen EPA's, state's, tribe's and the public's decisions.
Improved Agency operation, including the security collection and exchange of information.
A highly diverse, well- trained workforce able to benefit from information technology investments.
Enhanced information integrity, analysis, and access.
Build and maintain the necessary infrastructure using state-of-the-art hardware and software technologies to provide secure information, reliable data,
ellicient and timely access, and analytic information tools.
Current Year Goals
Provide technical guidance to Exchange Network partners as requested.
Provide technical/administrative guidance to Exchange Network grant applicants as requested.
Complete annual Exchange Network grant selection process.
Respond to all Requests for Changes (RFC) and Requests for Reconsideration (RFRO submitted through the Information Quality Guidelines process
involving Region 6.
Point of Contact : The Senior Information Resources Management Official is Lynda Can-oil, Assistant Regional Administrator for Management. The
information Resources Management Branch Chief is Dorian Reines.
143
-------
A.c=££iuu2i* .environmental Jusnce strategy
The Environmental Justice movement began in the early 199O's. In response to growing national concern, in 1994, President Clinton signed E.O. 12898, directing
HP A and other Federal agencies to focus attention on the impacts of environmental decisions on minority and low-income populations.
The EPA defines environmental justice as: "The fair treatment of people of all races, incomes, and cultures with respect to the development, implementation, and
enforcement of environmental laws, regulations and policies. Fair treatment implies that no person or group of people should shoulder a disproportionate share
of the negative environmental impacts resulting from the execution of this country 's domestic and foreign policy programs. " Numerous studies have shown that
there is a disproportionate burden of pollution and siting of pollution sources in minority and low-income communities. Environmental Justice aims to address
the issue of equity by providing equal protection to all populations, including minority and low-income communities, and to eliminate the disproportionate
impacts on these communities.
Environmental Justice aims to address the issue by ensuring that minority and low income populations receive equal protection and that those populations do not
bear a disproportionate share of environmental impacts.
Early in the Environmental Justice movement, Region 6 took a leadership role. A major reason for this is the fact that Region 6 is home to approximately 60% of
petrochemical manufacturing facilities in the nation. Also, approximately 40% of the nation's hazardous waste is generated in Region 6 with 45% being disposed
here. Current U.S. Census Bureau figures indicate dramatically increasing growth in minority and low-income populations in Texas, Louisiana and New Mexico.
Large industrial corridors such as the Mississippi River Corridor, U.S. Mexico Border and the Houston ship channel are also home to many minority and low-
income populations. With our unique geographic location, and the concentration of petroleum and chemical manufacturing, hazardous waste generation, and
treatment and disposal facilities, the Region faces a unique challenge in addressing the health, pollution, and regulatory issues that directly impact our minority
and low-income communities.
Some of the major programs, processes and actions Region 6 currently uses to assist the Environmental Justice communities include the following;
Grant Application Training for Environmental Justice communities - Once an Environmental Justice community is identified. Region 6 makes
training available to the community through a team of EPA trainers. This training empowers communities to effectively compete for financial
assistance to address specific local concerns.
Environmental Justice Fundamentals Training - Region 6 uses this training to bring together stakeholders on different sides of difficult issues to
foster communications in a non-threatening environment. Diverse stakeholders recently participated in a two-day training session at Kelly Air
Force base and, as a result, agreement was reached to continue a process of dialogue. These participants are now working collaboratively on an
interagency project called "Project Regeneration."
Environmental Justice Grant Program - Environmental Justice communities are financially supported through the Environmental Justice Small
Grant Program. Funds are provided through this program to Environmental Justice community-based groups to promote community
empowerment, public participation and environmental awareness.
State Agency Grant Program - Since a large portion of this Region's budget is directed to State Environmental Agencies, future grant
agreements will include conditions that require States to address environmental justice issues within their respective jurisdictions.
• Environmental Justice Listening Sessions - In November 2002, Region 6, along with stakeholders, held its first regional Environmental Justice
144
-------
Listening session. In these sessions, Federal, State and local environmental agencies met with representatives of the Environmental Justice
communities to listen to their issues, concerns, requests, and to identify solutions. These sessions were particularly effective in identifying local
needs and providing a forum for the honest exchange of ideas and information. State agencies, including the Louisiana Department of
Environmental Quality, the New Mexico Environment Department and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, are currently developing
plans for Environmental Justice Listening Sessions in the near future.
Population Identification/Region 6 Index Methodology - As Region 6 processes air and water permits, develops enforcement strategies, plans
superfund site cleanup actions and issues grant guidance, it is important that the Environmental Justice populations in the vicinity of these
situations are identified and assisted. Environmental Justice communities are identified through the Region's Environmental Justice Index
Methodology. This methodology combines geographic and U.S. Census data in such a way that vulnerable populations, which are located close
to potential pollution sources, can be quickly and accurately identified.
Communication - Traditional "public notice" methods have been expanded to include non-traditional means of communication such as
community bulletin boards, minority and special interest media, and faith-based communities. We try to be as flexible as possible by extending
public comment periods and setting meeting times and locations at non-traditional times and places.
Although Region 6 and its States have made significant strides in developing an effective Environmental Justice program, more can be done. In addition to
continuing the programs and activities outlined above, Region 6 has set the following long term strategic goals:
Empower EJ communities to identify and employ effective means to address concerns by providing them with proper tools and mechanisms
such as: a) financial and technical assistance; b) access to information and public participation; c) forums such as EJ Listening Sessions; and
d) local community/industry partnerships.
• Enhance employee awareness and sensitivity to EJ issues by providing EJ Fundamentals and advanced training. Training to EPA staff is
offered twice each quarter and for external customers, including state governments, on an as-needed basis.
Strengthen relationships/communications with EPA Program Offices and State DEQs and jointly develop processes to identify, prioritize, and
address EJ issues in the Region.
-------
During FV O4, •will assist 2 states in conducting EJ Listening Sessions.
During FY 04, will conduct 4 EJ Fundamentals Training classes for EPA staff.
Point of Contact: Shirley Augurson
146
-------
-------
Reduction of Environmental Health Risks to Children and the Aging
Current Condition
Protecting our children continues to be one of the nation's highest priorities. Children are particularly vulnerable to environmental health risks because their
systems, including their immune systems, are experiencing a time of rapid changes in growth and development. Each Regional program integrates protection of
children and sensitive populations within their mission, be it the remediation of a Superfund Site, the reuse of a RCRA facility, setting cleanup goals for water
es, and enforcement of all environmental regulations.
sources,
Children are more exposed to env.ronmental threats than adults. They eat proportionately more food, drink more fluids, breathe more air, and play outside more
than adults Th,s means that children may breathe ,n or mgest more pollutants per pound of body weight. Children are least able to protect themselves andflSdr
natural cunosity and tendency to explore leaves them open to health risks adults can more easily avoid. When young children play outsdeor craw or 'thetrou d
or floor, they are more exposed to potent.ally contaminated dust and soil, lead paint, household chemicals, and other potentially hazardous substances
waters; methyl
second-hand
h
h
agencies throughout the government.
Strategy Highlights
Establish collaborative relationships with children's health stakeholders to leverage resources to conduct cross-media workshops, summits and conferences for
health care providers. One aspect of this strategy will include building a relationship with NGO's, federal, state and local agencies comerences tor
Seek opportunities to network at conferences and workshops to identify organizations where there is a common interest and target audience- children (e a HHS
Head Start, HRSA, and local state environment and health departments) in reducing environmental health risks to children. cnnoren te.g., HHi
^ model to in
'° "*"* ^ '" C°™°™ti°™ ***> ^ ™dia 1
'- implementing projects or
148
-------
FY 2004 Goals
Sponsor two children's environmental health conferences and workshops in areas of high need (Houston and the Rio Grande Valley).
Sign an MOA with HHS that links their Head Start program with Children's Health.
-------
Regional Energy Strategy
The Energy Challenge
Ai
reliable, environmentally sound, and reasonable.
Conservation and Energy Efficiency
Over the past three decades, America has made impressive gains in energy efficiency. Today's automobiles use about 60% of the gasoline they used in 1972
While the U.S. economy has expanded by 126% since 1973, energy use has only increased by 30%. Conservation will provide benefits through an easing of the
burden on the need to development new energy production, lessen pollution impacts, and reduce energy costs to consumers. Conservation and efficiency programs
allow free market principles to change consumer behavior and foster environmental improvements.
Two energy efficiency programs, Energy Star appliances and Energy Star Home Construction, have and will contribute tremendously to a Modem Conservation
ethic. In 2002, Energy Star programs helped save enough energy to power 10 million homes and reduced air pollution the equivalent of taking 10 million cars off
the road. In May, 2001, Frisco, TX, became the first city in the United States to require that new homes be constructed at least 30% more efficient than the
International Energy Conservation Code. Through conservation, the average homeowner in Frisco will save over S425 a year in energy bills.
Energy Infrastructure
Much of America's energy infrastructure, power plants and refineries, transmission grids and distribution pipelines is operating at near capacity and consists of
components designed and constructed in the mid 20'h century. A single break in a gasoline pipeline, even if remediated quickly, can cause localized shortages and
price hikes. In August 2003, tens of millions of Americans and Canadians suffered an electrical blackout due to a breakdown in a transmission corridor Energy
resources, either as raw input materials or as refined supplies, are not always located in areas of greatest need or utility. Getting energy from the field to the end
consumers is a logistical challenge.
One hindrance to resol
EPA Region 6 has bee:
Iving the challenges to the nation's infrastructure is a system of complex, and at times conflicting, regulatory structures In the last 2 years
in an active participant in multi-agency meetings, task forces, and work groups designed to facilitate decision-making on permit applications.
network of natural gas pipelines that already exist off the coasts of Louisiana and Texas. Three corporations have applied for Deepwater Port Act licenses from the
Coast Guard / Maritime Administration and will need to obtain Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act permits as well from Region 6. Another three corporations are
working on their DPA applications. In a pilot program to enhance state and federal cooperation to locate pipeline and transmission corridors as well as exploration
for mineral resources on state and federal property, Region 6 participates in the Rocky Mountain Energy Council. The RMEC consists of state and federal
agencies that serve as energy or environmental stewards in the states of Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming.
150
-------
Increase Energy Supplies
One aspect of the current energy dilemma is an increased dependence, not only on foreign oil, but on a narrow range of energy options. In 2000, coal and nuclear
knn^ a°!° , d t0r °^er 70/0 ,of the U'S- electricity generation. While 90% of new generation plants under construction will be fired by natural gas, the U.S.
Known natural gas supplies are limited and we could become dependent on imports and vulnerable to price hikes and distribution disruptions. Renewable and
alternative sources of energy made up only 2% of the 2000 energy portfolio.
Other alternative sources of energy to be examined include wind farms, hydroelectric from water treatment plant discharges, biomass from agriculture and forestry
facilities, and advancement in fuel cell development.
Improved technology in exploration and production can make new sources of more traditional energy supplies (petroleum, natural gas, coal bed methane and coal)
ma more environmentally protective manner. An integrated approach to energy development can yield a cleaner environment, a stronger economy, and a
sufficient supply of energy sources for the future.
Future Directions
E
ted to increase. Major areas of impact and
neigy conservation projects and the promotion of renewable energy portfolios across the nation would produce immediate results and are consistent with the
lonal inergy Policy, which promotes sustainable energy independence. Conservation and renewable energy investments would reduce waste, reduce the
dependenc on forei '
dependency
renewae energy poroos across te naton would produce immeat
ergy Policy, which promotes sustainable energy independence. Conservation and renewable energy investme
on foreign sources of energy and make a strong investment in the Nation's future. While the Region has inve
s continue
.
ith various organizations to maximize energy conservation a
« ----- : ---- ,„ ..,_, „,.. ....... by.,
,
nd alternative energy development
.._ :rgy conservation and environmental improvement by hosting 4 conferences [2 focused on air quality improvements through
energy efficiency in Dallas and Houston for municipalities, and one for EPA national air innovations; one to address Waste-to-Energy opportunities for
~ " ding Operations industry]
Promote the link between energ
energy efficiency in Dallas and HUUDLUU xui iiiuiuuipamj
the Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations industry]
Improve relationships with the regulated industry by: developing an MOA with the EPA Region 6 state oil & gas regulatory agencies based on the IOGCC
MOU model; and hosting 2 semi-annual meetings with the state oil & gas regulatory agencies
Issue, as appropriate, CAA and CWA permits for 2 liquified natural gas terminals in the Gulf of Mexico under the Deepwater Port Act
-------
Region 6 Agriculture Sector Strategic Plan
More than 232 million acres of the 900 million a
nomies but it can and does in certain circumstances cause harm to the
ted by sediments,
ted by paniculate matter
agricultural operations are
becoming larger and more concentrated.
The above scenario of problems arising from concentrated agricultural practices is exemplified for surface water runoff issues in three areas of Region 6. These
areas are: the North Bosque River Watershed; the Illinois River water bordering Oklahoma and Arkansas; and the Gulf of Mexico hypoxia zone. In the first two
areas, phosphorus is the contaminant of concern, and animal wastes generated from concentrated animal feeding operations appear to be the major contributors.
However, in the case of the Bosque River Watershed, dairy farms are almost exclusively the issue. With respect to the Illinois River, poultry litter, along with
certain municipalities, appear to be the primary sources.
In Region 6, we have formed an Agriculture Committee consisting of staff and managers and chaired by a full-time senior agricultural advisor to systematically
address all agricultural concerns. Although these committee members are located in various divisions, routine meetings of the committee and continued close
collaboration between members ensures that agricultural issues are addressed in a holistic manner. The State of Louisiana has a Master Farmer Program that
is designed to demonstrate that agricultural producers can and will voluntarily reduce the impact that they have on the bayous, rivers and lakes within
Louisiana, if they given sufficient information, technical and financial support and time.
Strategic Plans
This strategic plan identifies specific environmental concerns and priorities related to agriculture to be addressed by EPA Region 6 over the next three to five
years. The Plan also provides a common set of policies and principles for integrating program work across the agricultural sector. It defines the role of the EPA
Region 6 Agriculture Committee and the Senior Agricultural Advisor.
We will continue to concentrate many of our resources (personnel and funding) to those geographical areas that are most impacted by agricultural
activities. As mentioned above, there are presently three areas which are receiving a considerable amount of the Region's attention and resources. It is
ur intention in the future to continue to pursue this avenue. We believe that, by concentrating a significant amount of our resources on these large areas
at have significant environmental impacts, we can get significant environmental improvement with moderate investment. The alternative would be to
egi
our
that
spread our resources over a broad gamut of agricultural activities. However, we believe this would lead to less environmental improvement because there
would be less leveraging of resources and collaboration with our federal and state partners.
Highlights
- Bosque River Watershed and Illinois River - We will work with the State Agricultural Agencies and NRCS to explore best management practices to
reduce phosphorus loadings into the respective rivers.
152
-------
- Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Zone - The Region will continue its efforts to work with the State of Louisiana and all the other states up river to implement
corrective action measures so as to reduce nutrient and sediment loadings into the Mississippi.
Region 6 will continue to use a sector approach to address environmental problems related to agriculture. By "sector approach" we mean agriculture as a
tor oi society, or as an economic system, that may involve a variety of EPA programs. This means any environmental issue relating to agriculture will
be dealt with an understanding of its relationship to all EPA programs. For example, efforts to reduce sediment in water will consider the potential
r3l r7 ? °'1S. °n efforts to reduce Particulate matter in the air, to promote sensible pest management, to preserve habitat, to protect ground water
quality, and on any of the many other environmental programs for which EPA has responsibility. In short, we will attempt to view these concerns as a
farmer might see them, and be aware of how one issue connects to another
Highlights
nl&""s»is
- Ag Committee Strengthened - Not only will the Regional Ag committee continue to exist, it will be strengthened by being formally
lecognized by senior management as the primary workgroup to address all Ag activities. It will be chaired by the Ag advisor and the committee
will meet at least once a month.
Highlights
-Watershed Planning- Region 6 will work with USDA/NRCS and the State Agriculture Agencies, to develop a watershed plan/strategy in at
least one watershed per year.
- State Meetings - We will meet at least once a year with one State to continue dialogue begun at the Regional Agriculture Dialogue meeting in
September 2002, in Arlington, on state specific environmental issues.
-Agricultural Liaison Positions - The Region will support at least one state agency liaison position to be located within the Regional office and
help the Region in its outreach activities. The liaison will be from the Agricultural Extension Service and will be located in our Pesticides
program.
- Agricultural BMPs and Drinking Water Sources - We will add an additional level of protection to the public drinking water supply by
ensuring that Best Management Practices for mitigating adverse impacts of agricultural practices that pose a potential risk to sources of drinking
water are a key component of each state's source -water protection program
We will integrate our traditional regulatory and enforcement approaches with expanded technical assistance and incentives.
Highlights
- Grant Utilization for Compliance Assistance - We will use a headquarters grant to assist CAFOs in compliance assistance with regards to
complying with the new CAFO general permit requirements.
We will build partnerships with the agricultural community which foster proactive, innovative, community-based, and common sense approaches to
environmental protection and land conservation.
-------
Highlights
- Conduct Ag Industry Meetings -The next year we will work with the State Agricultural agencies andNRCS in hosting listening forums with
Ag industry representatives. The meetings will be conducted to listen to the industries' concerns and issues to resolve problems dealing with
compliance of environmental regulations. The states and the respective Ag group representatives will be queried before a decision is made to
conduct the forum to see if there is adequate interest.
- Senior Management Meetings with Ag Commodity Representatives - On an as-requested basis, senior management in Region 6 will
continue to avail themselves to meet with a group of Ag commodities group representatives for the purpose of discussing pertinent issues. We
will meet with the group at least twice a year.
- Agricultural Website - The Ag committee will develop and maintain a regional agricultural website that will serve to inform the agricultural
community regarding pertinent EPA activities and allow them to ask questions of us via e-mail.
- Attend Ag Community Conventions and Conferences - To the degree that travel funds will allow, the Ag Advisor or representatives of the
Ag Committee will attend at least half a dozen of these types of agricultural functions in any given year to network and give presentations. In
this regard also, the Ag committee will develop an Ag display that can be exhibited at the representative conferences and conventions.
- Field Tours and Demonstrations - Whenever feasible, we will coordinate with Ag industry reps to conduct tours of agricultural operations.
We will attempt to do at least two of these a year. We will do at least two of these a year.
154
-------
-------
Strategic Management of Human Capital
Background
The President's Management Agenda has put new emphasis on the Federal government's most valuable resource, the employees, by listing the Strategic
Management of Human Capital as an initiative with which Agencies are charged to "Get to Green." The development of a highly skilled and motivated workforce
does not happen by accident. Agencies must plan for utilization of this most valuable resource through the development of a Human Capital Strategic Plan. EPA
Region 6 is committed to supporting EPA Headquarters in this Agency initiative.
support and complement the Agency's Human Capital Strategy as it provides an overview ui c™
support P of interdependent action strategies and improvements goals, e.g., the Recruitmen
l challenes.
ing proactively to our human capital challenges.
Planned Strategies to ImPr?Ve^n^™B|™or Managers and the Human Resources Office for greater managerial involvement in Human Capital Planning.
Continue to seek c.ose alignment of the Human Capital Plan to the Region 6 Strategic Plan.
Develop a region-wide accountability system to ensure that Region 6 is doing its part to help the Agency "Get to Green" in achieving the President's
Management Agenda.
« . means of reviewing FTE usage, determining vacancies, and identifying opportunities for creative hiring and staffing,
Endorse workforce planning as me UK»I» =
including external appointments.
Tl roueh a variety of recruitment avenues, attract and retain a talented, skilled, and diverse workforce with the necessary abilities and proficiencies to
accomplish the Region's mission and strategic goals.
tf Hrvelooment initiatives, including executive coaching, continued emphasis on training for new supervisors, and training
^^^^^^•^lna;A'naaa ^ Naturalizati°" SerViCe L-dershiP Development Center in Dallas, Texas.
Long Te^s^a^r^°ip'Scontinuitv and development through succession planning, supported by workforce analyses and optimal use of available executive
training resources.
Alisn the performance appraisal system more closely with the Agency's mission and with emp.oyee development and recognition programs, ultimately
improving individual and organizational performance. j 56
-------
Foster Region 6 employee creativity and innovation through new recognition approaches and processes which reward inventive management and
environmental problem-solving.
• Cultivate an increased atmosphere of human capital value through more communication between managers and supervisors and human resource
consultants.
FY 2004 Goals
Finalize and implement the Region 6 Human Capital Strategic Plan.
Direct workforce planning efforts to positions vacated through the Agency's early-out/buy-out incentive to ensure cost neutrality if/when positions are
filled.
Point of Contact: Richard Martinez, Human Resources Officer, (214) 665-6563
157
-------
Homeland Security
Regional Strategy
The Homeland Security program within EPA began with the publication of Presidential Decision Directive 63. Under this Directive, EPA was given responsibility
for security of the nation's drinking water systems. In addition, under Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA's) Federal Response Plan, EPA has been
assigned the lead for support functions relative to hazardous material emergencies.
p • fi nlaved an active role in recovery from the September 11, 2001, World Trade Center incident. We also served as the lead Agency in the recovery efforts
Reg,on 6 Played an active rolein ^^^ ^^ Smce Reg.Qn g ^ have major responsibilities in responding to any incident of national significance, our
goaUs to er^ure that our employees are fully equipped and trained to respond to a broad range of emergencies.
Region 6's Homeland Security Strategy will focus on the following activities to improve response and enhance water security.
j- .• v. f, ,.»r, the- media oroerams on Homeland Security issues occurs at the Regional Incident Coordination Team (RICT) meetings that are
Coordination between me ^ underway as a result of our weekly RICT meetings. We expect other initiatives and efforts will come from the
held weekly. J>evera Previously the RICT developed the Response Support Corp and determined the need to develop procedures for building
RICT over ^^"QP jn:,provernents. These efforts are at various stages of implementation or development. We expect some of these initiatives to be
further enhanced over the next few years.
RTCT Renion 6 has been focusing on its COOP and determining when building evacuation would occur. We have developed planned
In addition to trie KIL , Kct regarding COOP activation. We expect to further enhance this over the next few years as we go forward in
responses to four what 11. s^1™ B concern to the Region is the ability to access software should the COOP be activated. A major effort over the
next'fewyeTs^focus wTkey software and maintaining the critical needs data base. We will also continue testing the COOP.
Over the next five years,
back in the office for emergencies
158
-------
Region 6 has developed a counter-terrorism team (CT) consisting of eight OSCs and three Senior Environmental Employees. We will enhance training by
having two OSCs trained with expertise in chemical responses, two OSCs trained with expertise in biological responses, and two OSCs trained with
expertise in nuclear responses. Region 6 OSCs will participate in national workgroups focusing on development of EPA's national CT program. The
Region continues to work on improving its capability to respond effectively to incidents that may involve harmful chemical, biological, and radiological
substances. Over the next five years, we will continue to work with our Regional Response Team, Local Environmental Planning Committees, and other
federal, state, and local agencies in conducting emergency exercises to improve our responses
Region 6 is working to ensure the safety of critical water infrastructure in the event of terrorist or other intentional acts. We are working with local
drinking water and wastewater utilities to assess their vulnerability to terrorist or other intentional acts and to develop or revise their emergency response
plans. For drinking water systems, these efforts were reinforced by Congress, which required community water systems supplying water to more than
3,300 people to conduct vulnerability assessments and prepare emergency response plans. Our final congressional deadline is December 31, 2004.
Wastewater systems have also been conducting the full range of activities related to vulnerability assessments and emergency response plans. Since this is
not a "one time only" endeavor, we will continue to provide the full menu of technical assistance and training approaches to ensure that systems are
identifying their vulnerabilities and developing robust emergency response plans.
Contingency Plans for the 14 U.S.-Mexico Sister Cities will also significantly enhance the effectiveness of municipal authorities to cooperate in
responding to potentially disastrous incidents. Scientific and technical analyses, especially on methods and technologies, will improve the overall
capacity to protect drinking water and wastewater utilities. The Region will spearhead and support efforts under the national goals to develop effective
and affordable methods, technologies, equipment, and other tools needed to protect drinking water and wastewater systems from attack. Another major
activity that the Region will be undertaking over the next few years is working with Hospitals along the U.S./Mexico border such that they are better
incorporated into the Sister City plans as well as emergency response planning.
The Houston Laboratory will be working with the State and Local laboratories to set up a protected web-site for laboratories to exchange information on
the analysis of various constituents including WMD. It is the goal of the Houston Laboratory to get this web-site operational in FY04.
In FY2004, Region 6 will work with local Emergency Planning Committees to conduct 20 exercises.
FY 2004 Goals
Ensure compliance with the Bioterrorism Act for facilities of 50K to lOOKin completion of their vulnerability assessments and emergency plans.
100% is the goal.
Ensure compliance with the Bioterrorism Act for facilities of 3300 to 50K in completion of their vulnerability assessments - 80% is the goal.
-------
Innovating for Better Environmental Results: Region 6 Innovation Strategy
Background
In April 2001 EPA's Innovation Action Council developed a range of ideas and recommendations that served as the basis for the Agency's Innovation Strategv
The strategy, the Region espouses flows from the Nat.onal strategy and builds on experiences gained in voluntary and regulatory flexibilfty pro-ams to d^effnks
innovation to priority environmental priorities, and places particular emphasis on strong partnerships with States.
Environmental protection is an increasingly complex endeavor. Many organizations other than EPA - State, Local and Tribal governments businesses non
governmental organizations, and communities - now play influential roles in setting environmental priorities and deciding how to manage them The ranT,. F
available tools - environmental management systems, information, new technologies, economic incentives - continues to expand and they're acnievins inW •
results at a lower cost. Environmental goals are evolving from pollution control to solutions based on pollution prevention, industrial ecology and stewa^V A
there is widespread agreement that conventional regulatory approaches alone will not sustain continued environmental improvement. siewarosmp and
A new and improved system would enable more comprehensive environmental management by using more tailored, integrated strategies for facilities <^n s
communities. It would routinely use incentives to foster environmental stewardship and harness the power of new information technology to imDrovennhr "'
to information and streamline environmental reporting. It would also be more performance-based, requiring strong accountability for results while increa
flexibility for achieving them. ueasing
Current Condition
... ~j- r— -""o— -ry -_-- --—..„— -..„,.„,£>.,;, lu "=»i new strategies wnne continuing to operate conventions
nmental programs, dovetailing where possible and consistently striving for alignment. We must adapt to new roles beyond the traditional on« of fT
ifnrcer. We will need to be an innovator, a catalyst for change, and a readv nartncr vuith nth*.™ " ul reguiata
and enforcer. We will need to be an innovator, a catalyst for change, and a ready partner with others.
Planned Strategies to Improve Innovations
EPA's Innovation Strategy has been designed to:
• Strengthen the State-EPA partnership on environmental innovation;
Focus innovation efforts on addressing priority environmental problems;
• Continue to diversify approaches and tools available for environmental problem-solving;
• Create a culture and organizational systems that support innovation and ensure lasting change
160
-------
EPA's Innovation Strategy identified specific environmental challenges as targets of opportunity for innovation, greenhouse gases, water quality, water
infrastructure and smog — as the primary focus. Although not an exclusive list, these areas are EPA's top priorities for innovation.
While shifting the primary focus to environmental problems, EPA's innovation strategy must also assure the continuing development of new tools and approaches
available for problem solving, such as market trading for some and strict discharge limits for others; voluntary and regulatory programs; integrated compliance
strategies that use a combination of compliance assistance, incentives and enforcement; multi-media approaches, information-based campaigns; and tailored
approaches for small businesses and others. We will rely less on end-of-pipe technology requirements and more on whole-facility environmental management with
a strong emphasis on accountability for meeting specific performance requirements.
EPA must continue to add to the environmental protection tool kit and encourage creative combination of traditional and new approaches, working with States,
EPA can provide leadership in moving new tools and approaches.
As EPA develops new tools and approaches, it will build upon a broad base of innovative activities that already exist - an accumulation of many years and much
hard work. There are large multi-media "flagship" programs such as National Environmental Performance Track, Smart Growth, and the National Environmental
Performance Partnership Program. Other significant voluntary programs include Brownfields, Energy Star, High Production Volume testing program for
chemicals, Design for the Environment, and Compliance Assistance Centers. Still others support State initiatives such as the State Innovation Grants competition
and projects included in the EPA/State innovations agreement. EPA's Innovation Action Council has developed a catalog of major innovation programs and
projects that will help EPA, States, and Tribes tap into ongoing efforts and share ideas that may be transferrable.
Over time, EPA, including Region 6 will need to align the various innovation programs with the vision of an improved system of environmental protection and
reduce their number to a more manageable set. In the short term, EPA should concentrate new activity in these programs to drive innovation to address the
priority issues identified above. Region 6 provides critical support for the above high-profile programs.
Long Term Strategic Goals
Changing how EPA approaches environmental problem-solving poses significant management challenges. Recent experience at EPA, as well as from other
Cou
the EPA systems of manage
people who work at the Agency.
The Region 6 believes a system should value ideas from within the organization, as well as from parties outside EPA. The Region is seeking a robust system that
seeks out new ideas and fosters a belief that ideas from all parties will receive a fair and thorough review and chance for implementation. On the organizational
level we want to show individual staff members that they can make a difference.
161
-------
Complete Region 6 Innovation Strategy
Implement one (1) alternative approach innovation pilot project in partnership with a State agency
Maintain a 25% annual increase in membership in the Performance Track program.
162
-------
163
-------
SECTION V
ACCOUNTABILITY
-------
Region 6 Accountability Plan
A major portion of our accountability plan involves the participation of our partners in the development of our long term and annual
goals. In the Strategies Section of the Region 6 Plan, we outlined our long term strategic targets and 3-5 associated annual
performance measures/goals that we believe are key to making progress toward meeting our long term targets. We also identified the
supporting actions and processes we will use to implement our strategies. To obtain input from our partners, we asked each State
Commissioner and Tribe within Region 6 to identify their environmental priorities for the next 3-5 years. Additionally, each Region 6
Division Director communicated with their State counterparts to identify and discuss their respective program priorities. We have,
where possible, incorporated the priorities of our partners in our Regional Plan. Follow-on meetings have been held, or will be held in
the near future, to resolve differences and concerns identified by our partners.
To augment our accountability efforts, the RA and his Deputy will measure performance during regularly scheduled performance
review meetings with the senior managers of each program. Briefing charts will be prepared by the responsible senior staff members
for each of their respective sub-objectives. The charts will contain narrative as well as statistical data. The charts will include the
following information:
Goal /Objective/Sub-objective Number and Title - From National Plan
• Region's Annual Performance Measure/Goal - From Regional Plan
Status Indicator - Red/Yellow/Green
Analysis Statement - Describes accomplishments, problems, issues and overall progress to date
• Required Adjustments - Describes any changes in resources, actions, policies necessary to meet the annual goal.
Forecast - The responsible Division Director's prognosis of the Region's ability to meet the annual goal
Division POC - The manager who is primarily for accomplishing the annual goals.
• Statistical Chart - Graph, bar chart, pie chart, etc. to depict the goal and current status
Information gleaned from these meetings will provide the RA/DRA with an overview of the progress the Region is making on the
targets identified in the plan. These meetings will also give the RA/DRA an opportunity to initiate conversations with State
counterparts and Tribes on actions to improve joint efforts to protect the environment. This will help the RA/DRA more fully
understand our partner's associated contributions, plans, workload, resources, restrictions and concerns, thereby, assuring that, to
maximum extent possible, we are working as one with our partners and NPMs to provide the highest level of environmental protection
possible to the Region. The RA and DRA will also use this information to regularly engage the Region's program managers and
National Program Managers in meaningful conversations as to the appropriateness of our long term targets, annual targets, strategies,
resource allocations and workload distribution. This information can then be used by the RA/DRA to redirect regional
work/resources.
166
-------
In addition to the Region-wide performance measurement effort outlined above, each Division in Region 6 utilizes both National and
local tools to measure performance in their respective program areas. The following is a non-comprehensive list of the major
performance measurement tools currently used by Region 6 managers.
Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) - This system allows the Region to track planned and actual
compliance and enforcement activities and the results of those efforts. It records information on inspections,
compliance determinations, and enforcement actions. Some of the primary information that can be obtained in ICIS is
the number of actions, as well as the results from those actions, such as pollutant reductions, injunctive relief, penalties,
and information on the Supplemental Environmental Projects. Data is available for all Regions, making it possible to
compare our successes with those nationally.
Regional Compliance Assistance Tracking System (RCATS) - This system contains information on our compliance
assistance activities and associated outcomes. In FY04, RCATS will be incorporated as a component of ICIS.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) - This system
contains general information on sites across the region including location, status, contaminants, and actions taken. This
is the official data management system for the Superfund Program and is used to plan future activities and track
accomplishments.
• The air programs in Region 6 are intended to attain and maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
Ultimately, progress is tracked by the air quality monitoring systems that are reported into AIRS data base. Another
mechanism to track progress is the annual estimates of the amount of emissions from industrial, mobile and area
sources, which are tracked in the National Emissions Trend (NET) inventory.
• To achieve progress in air programs, States provide plans for the reduction of emissions, or State Implementation Plans
(SIPs), that are submitted to EPA for approval. For industrial sources, the requirements of these plans are incorporated
into operating permits. To track the approval status of SIP revisions, Region 6 maintains two data bases, one for
general State Implementation Plans and another for permits and economic incentive plans. These data bases track the
submission date, determination of administrative completeness, and approval status of each plan submission. As part
of this oversight role, the Region tracks each of our States' issuance of New Source Review and Operating Permits.
The operating permits data is submitted into the national Title V Operating Permits Systems (TOPS) data base. The
Region also maintains a local data base to track the permits that have been proposed and issued by our States.
167
-------
Region 6 also uses AQSProd, the Oracle relational database to ^ack the air quality data reported by state, county, city,
and tribal agencies to the US EPA. This data also becomes part of the AIRS data base.
For the RCRA program, RCRAInfo is a national database that tracks RCRA, TSD permitting and corrective action
program process ?n Region 6 it is implemented primarily by the fully authorized states and v.rtually all accomplished
RCRTprog-Sn activities are entered into the database by the states. The information in the database is accessible to
EPAHeadJuarters and Regions as well as the states. The Region and EPA Headquarters use RCRAInfo to establish
annual goals with the states, track progress, report on GPRA commitments and ensure that the RCRA program is on
track.
Permit Comoliance System (PCS) - This system is the information management system that supports the National
PoHutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. This system allows the Region to track data related to
rmits issued under the NPDES program to facilitate discharging wastewater into navigable waterways. Utilization of
pr^r,rovides the Region, in particular, the Water Quality Protection Division, information related to the type, size,
location and amount of discharge for regulated facilities. The PCS database is a core national environmental database
that is available to users both inside and outside the Agency.
r™ Edition to national systems for tracking and monitoring assistance funding and recipient performance (Grantee
In addition IO 'V^^ jnitiative [GCAI], Integrated Financial Management System [IFMS], Grants Information
System FIGMS] Grants Information and Control System [GICS], and Grants Tracking and Reporting
rCRTSl) Region 6 utilizes a local system, Branch Activity Tracking System (BRATS) which provides a
frhanism for Water Program Managers to track the status of assistance funding from award to closeout. BRATS
"dudes information on recipients, award amount, project and budget periods, project status quality assurance
requirements and other critical analysis and assessment data. It also provides a mechanism for tracking receipt and
review of project deliverables and accomplishment of annual performance evaluations.
Post Award Management - It is the Region's expectation that each of its assistance agreements is reviewed annually on
at leaVt a "baseline" level Baseline monitoring takes place on every award issued on an ongoing basis throughout the
hfetfme of the award. Baseline monitoring includes ensuring that programmatic award terms and conditions are
satisfied Project Officers also regularly review the financial status of the award and identify actions needed to take
place for facilitating accomplishment of stated objectives.
168
-------
The Water Quality Protection Division employs annual workplans, progress reporting, file reviews, field inspections,
end-of-year evaluations, and day-to-day communications to track progress and identify obstacles to the accomplishment
of stated goals and objectives The utilization of these methods minimizes the risk of missed objectives by offering an
opportunity to resolve issues as early in the process as possible. (More detailed information on how these tools are used
in specific water programs is available, if needed)
Region 6 NPDES Permits Performance Based Oversight Procedure - The procedure establishes criteria for evaluating
and overseeing the performance of each state NPDES program. Both quality and quantity of NPDES permits are
considered in assessing state performance. The results of this tool will assist management in allocation of resources and
allows the Region to focus on state/program areas with the greatest needs.
NPDES Information Tracking Application (NITA) - This Region 6 Oracle database application using PCS and local
data allows the Region to track the States' progress in meeting the national permit backlog reduction goals. Calculated
values generated by this application are used for in-house tracking purposes and for publishing periodic permit backlog
reduction status reports to the States. Future enhancements to the application will track implementation of the Regional
NPDES Oversight Reduction Procedures.
NPDES Program Evaluations - The Region periodically performs audits of the States' administration of the NPDES
program. The results of the evaluation audits are used to highlight program successes and to suggest corrective actions
if necessary.
NPDES Program Integrity Management System - The NPDES Program Integrity Management System utilizes tools
which assess NPDES program performance and provide the necessary information and direction for making
adjustments to program activities. These assessment tools include Assessment Guides, NPDES Management Reports
(made up of data from national databases ), and NPDES Program Integrity Profiles (a summary of state performance)
Data will be available for all Regions, making it possible to compare our successes with those nationally.
169
------- |