United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office Of
Chief Financial Officer
(2732)
EPA 205-R-99-003
January 1 999
&EPA FY 1999 Final Annual Plan
-
.
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY 1999 Final Annual Plan
Table of Contents
Introduction and Overview
Mission Statement and Agency Purpose i-1
Goals i-2
Organization for the Final Annual Plan i-4
Overview of the Plan i-6
Goal 1: Clean Air 1-1
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water H-l
Goal 3: Safe Food HI-1
Goal 4: Preventing Pollution and Reducing Risk in Communities, Homes,
Workplaces and Ecosystems IV-1
Goal 5: Better Waste Management and Restoration of Contaminated
Waste Sites V-l
Goal 6: Reduction of Global and Cross-Border Environmental Risks VI-1
Goal 7: Expansion of American's Right to Know About Their Environment VII-1
Goal 8: Sound Science, Improved Understanding of Environmental Risks,
and Greater Innovation to Address Environmental Problems Vffl-1
Goal 9: A Credible Deterrent to Pollution and Greater Compliance
with the Law DC-1
Goal 10: Effective Management X-l
Special Analysis
The Customer Service Program and its Goals SA-1
Costs and Benefits for Economically Significant Rule in 1999 Or 2000 S A-3
-------
EPA's Mission and Purpose
The mission of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to protect human health and to safeguard
the natural environment air, water, and land upon which life depends. EPA's purpose is to ensure that:
All Americans are protected from
significant risks to human health and the
environment where they live, learn, and
work.
National efforts to reduce environmental
risk are based on the best available
scientific information.
Federal laws protecting human health and
the environment are enforced fairly and
effectively.
Environmental protection is an integral
consideration in U.S. policies concerning
natural resources, human health, economic
growth, energy, transportation, agriculture,
industry, and international trade, and these
factors are similarly considered in
establishing environmental policy.
All parts of society-communities,
individuals, business, state and local
governments, and tribal governmentshave
access to accurate information sufficient to
effectively participate in managing human
health and environmental risks.
Environmental protection contributes to
making our communities and ecosystems
diverse, sustainable, and economically
productive.
The United States plays a leadership role in
working with other nations to protect the
global environment.
-------
EPA's Goals
EPA has developed a series often strategic, long-term Goals in its Strategic Plan. These goals, together
with the underlying principles that will be used to achieve them, define the Agency's planning, budgeting,
analysis, and accountability process.
Preventing Pollution and Reducing Risk
in Communities, Homes, Workplaces
and Ecosystems: Pollution prevention and
risk management strategies aimed at cost-
effectively eliminating, reducing, or
minimi/ing emissions and contamination
will result in cleaner and safer
environments in which all Americans can
reside, work, and enjoy life. EPA will
Clean Air: The air in every American
community will be safe and healthy to
breathe. In particular, children, the elderly,
and people with respiratory ailments will be
protected from health risks of breathing
polluted air. Reducing air pollution will
also protect the environment, resulting in
many benefits, such as restoring life in
damaged ecosystems and reducing health
risks to those whose subsistence depends
directly on those ecosystems.
Clean and Safe Water: All Americans
will have drinking water that is clean and
safe to drink. Effective protection of
America's rivers, lakes, wetlands, aquifers,
and coastal and ocean waters will sustain
fish, plants, and wildlife, as well as
recreational, subsistence, and economic
activities. Watersheds and their aquatic
ecosystems will be restored and protected
to improve public health, enhance water
quality, reduce flooding, and provide
habitat for wildlife.
Safe Food: The foods Americans eat will
be free from unsafe pesticide residues.
Children especially will be protected from
the health threats posed by pesticide
residues, because they are among the most
vulnerable groups in our society.
safeguard ecosystems and promote the
health of natural communities that are
integral to the quality of life in this nation.
Better Waste Management, Restoration
of Contaminated Waste Sites, and
Emergency Response: America's wastes
will be stored, treated, and disposed of in
ways that prevent harm to people and to the
natural environment. EPA will work to
clean up previously polluted sites, restoring
them to uses appropriate for surrounding
communities, and respond to and prevent
waste-related or industrial accidents.
Reduction of Global and Cross-Border
Environmental Risks: The United States
will lead other nations in successful,
multilateral efforts to reduce significant
risks to human health and ecosystems from
climate change, stratospheric ozone
depletion, and other hazards of
international concern.
i-2
-------
Expansion of Americans' Right to Know
About Their Environment: Easy access
to a wealth of information about the state
of their local environment will expand
citizen involvement and give people tools
to protect their families and their
communities as they see fit. Increased
information exchange between scientists,
public health officials, businesses, citizens,
and all levels of government will foster
greater knowledge about the environment
and what can be done to protect it.
Sound Science, Improved Understanding
of Environmental Risk, and Greater
Innovation to Address Environmental
Problems: EPA will develop and apply
the best available science for addressing
current and future environmental hazards,
as well as new approaches toward
improving environmental protection.
A Credible Deterrent to Pollution and
Greater Compliance with the Law: EPA
will ensure mil compliance with laws
intended to protect human health and the
environment.
Effective Management: EPA will
establish a management infrastructure that
will set and implement the highest quality
standards for effective internal management
and fiscal responsibility.
i-3
-------
Organization of the Annual Plan
The organization of EPA's FY 1999 Final Annual Plan reflects the Agency's continuing commitment to
link planning and budgeting in a coherent, integrated process. In the spirit of reinventing government to better
serve the American people, the Agency presented its FY 1999 budget as its Annual Plan. While the initial FY
1999 Annual Plan represented the President's Budget Request, the FY 1999 Final Annual Plan reflects the
Agency's enacted budget.
The Annual Plan presents the Agency's Goals and Objectives, and identifies the resource levels and
activities associated with them. The Annual Plan sets forth in measurable and quantifiable form the intermediate
levels of performance for each objective in the budget year; as such, it is the linchpin to each of the Agency's
Objectives contained in the Agency's five-year Strategic Plan. As a result, the Annual Plan promotes fiscal
accountability through a direct connection between resources and outcomes.
GOAL CHAPTERS
The FY 1999 Final Annual Plan is organized by the Agency's 10 Strategic Goals. Within each Goal
chapter, you will find the following sections:
Background and Context: Sets the broad
context for the Goal and briefly explains
why the Goal is of National importance.
Means and Strategy:
Agency's approach to
strategic Goal.
Describes the
achieving the
Resource Summary: Provides a broad
overview of the resources for FY 1999 by
Goal, Objective, and Appropriation.
Strategic Objective: Includes all the
Objectives under each Goal and links the
Objectives with:
Key Programs: Resources levels are listed
for Key Programs which help to achieve the
Objective. The Key Programs do not
account for all resources in the Objective.
Annual Performance Goals and
Measures: Objective sections contain
"Congressional" Annual Performance
Goals, which are commitments by the
Agency to Congress to achieve certain
levels of performance. The accompanying
Performance Measures provide the means
for determining the extent to which annual
goals and multi-year objectives are
achieved.
External Factors: This section addresses
the external-Agency factors that could have
a substantial impact on the achievement of
the Annual Performance Goals. External
factors may include the participation in
environmental programs by State and local
governments and other stakeholders, or
economic and technological factors that
may enhance or impede progress toward
achieving environmental goals.
i-4
-------
Verification and Validation: This section
describes how the values used in
Performance Measures are verified and
validated. This section includes a
description of the source of performance
measure data as well as procedures for
quality assurance. This section may also
include information on the methodology of
data collection and review.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BUDGETED RESOURCES AND ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS
AND MEASURES
Annual Performance Goals are related to the
resource levels contained in each Objective. Annual
Performance Goals in this Annual Performance Plan
are based upon the resource levels in the Agency's
enacted FY1999 budget However, resources may
contribute not only to the budget year's Annual
Performance Goals but also to the accomplishment
of Goals in future years. For example, a
performance goal to complete a number of
Superfund site cleanups, or develop research
methods and models, generally requires a period
longer man one year. Thus, FY 1999 activities will
contribute to completion of work in FY 1999 or
beyond. Likewise, some FY 1999 Annual
Performance Goals are achievable only with funding
provided in prior years.
Given this multi-year characteristic of some of the
resources requested, it is not always possible to
establish direct linkages between the budget
requested for a particular year and the achievement
of all performance goals for that year.
i-5
-------
Annual Plan Overview
For over 25 years, the Environmental Protection Agency and its partners have made significant strides
in controlling pollution and other environmental risks to human health and the environment. The air, land, and
water are now safer for all Americans due to our Nation's investment in environmental protection.
The EPA's plan for FY 1999 builds on that success and invests in programs that deliver consistently
better environmental protection at less cost. The EPA's FY 1999 Final Annual Plan highlights significant
programs and activities the Agency will undertake with its enacted budget of $7.590 billion and 18,385 FTE.
This Annual Plan represents the EPA's new approach to planning and budgeting, which links goals and
objectives to the human, capital, and technological resources required to achieve them. The EPA's FY 1999 Final
Annual Plan is another step forward in the Agency's full participation in the Government Performance and
Results Act (GPRA), which is designed to increase the effectiveness and accountability of Federal Agencies.
KEY PROGRAMS AND INITIATIVES
The EPA is committed to providing the greatest degree of environmental protection at the lowest
possible cost and regulatory burden to citizens and businesses. The Agency has several key initiatives which are
designed to address environmental risks effectively while maintaining the Administration's commitment to a
strong economy and a streamlined Federal government.
Many of these initiatives are supported across the Agency and involve a number of strategic goals and
objectives. They all work to support the Agency's mission to reduce risk to human health and safeguard the
environment for future generations.
ENSURE CLEAN AND SAFE WATER
The President has made the protection of
America's water supply and waterways a national
priority. To meet this commitment, the FY 1999
enacted budget supports the Agency's involvement
in the Clean Water Action Plan as well as strong
support for the Nation's water infrastructure
through State Revolving Funds:
Clean Water Action Plan: The EPA will play a
key role in the Clean Water Action Plan
(CWAP), focusing on three challenges to
restore and protect the Nation's waterways:
preventing polluted runoff; protecting public
health; and ensuring community-based
watershed management. This initiative is
funded in the Agency's Annual Plan at $605
million. The Agency also provides for an
additional $20 million in CWAP related
activities such as source water protection, the
Index of Watershed Indicators, and research.
This initiative increases grants to States to
implement water quality improvement projects
as well as other Agency activities such as the
restoration and protection of our Nation's
wetlands.
Infrastructure- The budget proposes $775
million in capitalization grants for Drinking
Water State Revolving Funds (SRFs), which
make low-interest loans to help municipalities
meet the requirements of the Safe Drinking
Water Act Amendments. The funds will help
ensure that Americans have a safe, clean
drinking water supply our first line of defense
in protecting public health. The budget also
include $ 1.350 billion in capitalization grants to
Clean Water SRFs to help municipalities
comply with the Clean Water Act, thus helping
to reduce beach closures and keep our
i-6
-------
waterways safe and clean. The combined SRF
proposal, with continued outyear capitalization,
will meet the Administration's long-term goal
to provide about $2.5 billion a year in loans to
needy communities.
MEETING THE GLOBAL WARMING
CHALLENGE
The United States has made a commitment to
lead the world in reducing greenhouse gas emissions
through market forces, new technology and energy
efficiency. The Climate Change Technology
Initiative (CCTI), funded in the EPA's budget at
$109.5 million in FY 1999, will help America
continue to meet its global responsibility to lead the
world in emissions reductions. CCTI is an inter-
agency initiative led by EPA and the Department of
Energy to support research and technology
advancements in energy efficiency, renewable
energy, and carbon-reduction technologies.
IMPLEMENTING STRONGER CLEAN AIR
STANDARDS
This budget invests $65.7 million in a national
network of Particulate Matter Monitors to help the
Nation meet the health based air quality standard for
fine particles. This investment level honors the
Administration's commitment to States to fund the
costs of deploying a new fine paniculate monitoring
network and to provide them the tools necessary to
carry out their monitoring efforts. The EPA will
also be conducting analyses to determine the
chemical constituents of PM 2.5 and better identify
and understand the sources and characteristics of the
pollution. This effort will lead to cleaner, safer air
for all Americans.
PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH
One of the President's foremost policy concerns
is the protection of human health through the
reduction of environmental threats. To reduce
environmental threats and protect future
generations, the Agency focuses on areas where it
can provide the greatest amount of protection, such
as the cleanup of toxic waste sites and the protection
of children from toxins in the environment.
Cleaning up Toxic Waste Sites; The
budget continues a commitment to clean up
toxic waste sites with $1.5 billion for
Superfund cleanups. Combined with
continuing administrative reforms, these
funds will help meet the President's pledge
to clean up the most hazardous waste sites.
Agency has made the protection of
children's health a fundamental goal of
public health and environmental protection
in the U.S. This annual plan builds on mat
commitment with a $33 million investment
(an $8 million increase over 1998) for the
Assessing Health Risks to Children
Agenda. This is a high-priority for the
Agency since children face significant and
unique health threats because they are often
more heavily exposed and more vulnerable
than adults to toxins in the environment
When we protect the health of children, we
protect the health of all Americans. Major
activities include establishing, with HHS,
five Children's Environmental Research
Centers, ensuring that EPA's public health
regulations consider children's health, and
providing information to parents to better
protect their children from environmental
hazards.
Reducing Risks Posed by Persistent.
Bioaccumulative. and Toxic Pollutants:
The Agency is strengthening its efforts to
address the health threat presented by
persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic
(PBT) pollutants. This initiative is funded
at $9.3 million in the 1999 Revised Annual
Plan (a $6.3 million increase over 1998).
The Agency will conduct research and
coordinate strategies to reduce the risks
posed by PBTs using the full range of
regulatory, voluntary, programmatic,
enforcement, compliance and research
tools. PBT risk mitigation activities will
i-7
-------
include analysis of economic impact,
pollution prevention strategies, exploration
of safe substitute chemical alternatives and
dissemination of public information. This
multi-year initiative will reduce PBTs in the
environment and reduce the risks these
toxins pose to human health.
INVESTING IN SCIENCE FOR SOUND
DECISION-MAKING
Environmental research is critical for
developing the scientific understanding and
technological tools to allow the Nation to enhance
environmental quality for current and future
generations. The Agency's FY1999 enacted budget
includes $562 million for EPA's Office of Research
and Development (ORD). This investment will
provide a scientific basis for developing cost-
effective environmental policies, create the
knowledge base for citizens to make wise
environmental decisions, and enable new and better
approaches to environmental protection.
REVITALIZING COMMUNITIES
THROUGH THE BROWNFIELDS
INITIATIVE
The FY 1999 enacted budget continues the
President's Brownfields initiative, which promotes
local cleanup and redevelopment of industrial sites,
bringing jobs to blighted areas. This budget includes
$91 million for technical assistance and grants to
communities for site assessment and redevelopment
planning as well as revolving loan funds to finance
clean-up efforts at the local level.
STRENGTHENING PARTNERSHIPS WITH
INDIAN TRIBES
This Annual Plan continues the Agency's
commitment to carrying out its trust responsibilities
to Federally-recognized tribes with a budget of $174
million (a $35 million increase over 1998). The
Indian Program includes cross-Agency activities
designed to ensure the protection of public health
and the tribal homeland environment in a manner
consistent with a government-to-government
relationship. The Indian Program is a priority for the
Agency because the sub-standard environmental
conditions of many tribal homelands pose threats to
human health, Tribal economies, and ecosystems.
The program will enhance environmental protection
by increasing the number of partnerships with tribal
governments, providing infrastructure assistance,
and helping to resolve trans-boundary
environmental issues.
IMPROVING PUBLIC ACCESS TO
INFORMATION
All U.S. citizens have a right to know about the
pollutants in their environment including the
condition of the air they breathe and the water they
drink, as well as the health effects of the chemicals
used in the food and products they buy. Access to
environmental information also helps make
American citizens involved and informed
environmental decision makers, and promotes
creative and lasting solutions to environmental
problems. EPA's participation in the President's
Environmental Monitoring for Public Access and
Community Tracking (EMPACT) initiative, funded
at $14 million in this Annual Plan, helps to carry out
this commitment to provide the public with crucial
information on environmental conditions.
SUMMARY
The EPA's 1999 Final Annual Plan embodies
the Agency's commitment to protect human health
and safeguard the environment, while continuing on
the nation's path of unprecedented economic
growth. As the Agency strengthens its relationships
with the public, the regulated community, and its
governmental partners, it will provide a more
effective and efficient system of environmental
protection. These partnerships, along with a
commitment to identity and solve the Nation's most
pressing environmental problems, will help us leave
a cleaner, safer environment for generations to
come.
i-8
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Goal: dean Air
The air in every American community will be safe and healthy to breathe. In particular, children, the
elderly, and people with respiratory ailments will be protected from health risks of breathing polluted air.
Reducing air pollution will also protect the environment, resulting in many benefits, such as restoring life in
damaged ecosystems and reducing health risks to those whose subsistence depends directly on those ecosystems.
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
Despite concerted efforts to achieve cleaner,
healthier air, air pollution continues to be a
widespread public health and environmental
problem in the United States, contributing to
illnesses such as cancer, respiratory, developmental
and reproductive problems. In many cases, air
pollutants end up on the land or in rivers, lakes and
streams, harming the life in them. Air pollution also
makes soil and waterways more acidic, reduces
visibility and corrodes buildings.
MEANS AND STRATEGY
EPA is responding to air pollution because the
problem is national and international in scope. The
majority of the population lives in expanding urban
areas, where air pollution crosses local and state
lines and, in some cases, crosses our borders with
Canada and Mexico. Federal assistance and
leadership are essential for developing cooperative
state, local, tribal, regional and international
programs to prevent and control air pollution and
for ensuring that national standards are met.
T7 PA develops standards to protect public health
J/and the environment that limit concentrations of
the most widespread pollutants (known as
criteria pollutants), which are linked to many serious
health and environmental problems:
Ground-level ozone. Exacerbates
respiratory illness especially in active
children, aggravates respiratory illnesses
such as asthma and causes damage to
vegetation and visibility problems.
Carbon monoxide. Interferes with the
delivery of oxygen to body tissues,
affecting particularly people with
cardiovascular diseases.
Sulfur dioxide. Aggravates the symptoms
of asthma and is a major contributor to acid
rain.
Nitrogen oxides. Irritates the lung and
contributes to the formation of ground-level
ozone, acidic deposition and visibility
problems.
Lead. Causes nervous system damage,
especially in children, leading to reduced
intelligence.
Particulate matter (PM). Linked to
premature death in the elderly and people
with cardiovascular disease, respiratory
illness in children; affects the environment
through visibility impairment.
Hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), commonly
referred to as air toxics or toxic air pollutants, are
pollutants that cause, or may cause, adverse health
1-1
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY1999 Final Annual Plan
effects or ecosystem damage. The Clean Air Act
(CAA) lists 188 pollutants or chemical groups as
hazardous air pollutants and targets sources emitting
them for regulation.
Examples of air toxics include heavy metals like
mercury and chromium, dioxins and pesticides such
as chlordane and toxaphene. HAPs are emitted from
literally thousands of sources including stationary as
well as mobile sources.
Adverse effects to human health and the
environment due to HAPs can result from exposure
to air toxics from individual facilities, exposures to
mixtures of pollutants found in urban settings, or
exposure to pollutants emitted from distant sources
that are transported through the atmosphere over
regional, national or even global air sheds.
Compared to information for the criteria
pollutants, the information concerning potential
health effects of the HAPs (and their ambient
concentrations) is relatively incomplete. Most of the
information on potential health effects of these
pollutants is derived from experimental animal data.
Of the 188 HAPs referenced previously, almost 60
percent are classified by EPA as known, probable or
possible carcinogens.
Some Maximum Achievable Control
Technology (MACT) standards, particularly the
coating rules, typically achieve concurrent reduction
in both Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) and
HAP emissions. The standards reduce the
emissions created by evaporation of solvents from
the coatings and these solvents often contain both
HAP and VOC. Air toxic and particulate matter
pollution share common sources. In some cases
particulates are also hazardous air pollutants.
One of the more documented ecological
concerns associated with toxic air pollutants is the
potential for some to damage aquatic ecosystems, In
some cases, deposited air pollutants can be
significant contributors to overall pollutant loadings
entering water bodies.
The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
established an emissions trading program to control
emissions from electric power plants that cause acid
rain and other environmental and public health
problems. Emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and
nitrogen oxide (NO*) react in the atmosphere and
fall to earth as acid rain, causing acidification of
lakes and streams and contributing to the damage of
trees at high elevations.
NOX emissions are a major precursor of ozone,
which affects public health and damages crops,
forests, and materials. NOX deposition also
contributes to eutrophication of coastal waters, such
as the Chesapeake and Tampa Bays. Additionally,
before falling to earth, S02 and NOX gases form fine
particles that affect public health by contributing to
premature mortality, chronic bronchitis, and other
respiratory problems.
The fine particles also contribute to reduced
visibility in national parks and elsewhere. Acid
deposition also accelerates the decay of building
materials and paints and contributes to degradation
of irreplaceable cultural objects such as statues and
sculptures.
1-2
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY1999 Final Annual Plan
Percent Change in National Air Quality Concentrations and Emissions (1988-1996)
Air Quality Concentration
% Change 1987-1996
Emissions % Change
1987-1996
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Lead
Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)
Ozone (VOC)
PMjo*
Sulfur Dioxide SOX
-37%
-75%
-10%
-15%
-25%
-37%
-18%
-50%
+3%
-18%
-14%
SOURCE: National Air Quality and Emissions Trend Report, 19%.
* Based on 1988 to 1996 data.
+ Includes only directly emitted particles. Secondary PM formed from SOX, NOX, and other gases comprises a significant
fraction of ambient PM.
The above table summarizes the 10-year
percent changes hi national air quality
concentrations and emissions. It shows that air
quality has continued to improve during the past 10
years for all six pollutants.
Nationally, the 1996 air quality levels are
the best on record for all six criteria pollutants.
hi fact, all the years in the 1990s have had
better air quality than all the years in the 1980's,
showing a steady trend of improvement.
The dramatic improvements in emissions
and air quality occurred simultaneously with
significant increases in economic growth and
population. The improvements are a result of
effective implementation of clean air laws and
regulations, as well as improvements in the
efficiency of industrial technologies.
While progress has been made, it is
important to not lose sight of the magnitude of
the air pollution problem mat still remains. Based
upon monitoring data submitted to EPA's data
base, approximately 46 million people in the United
States reside in counties that did not meet the air
quality standard for at least one of the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
pollutants for the single year 1996.
Percent of 1970 Value
250
200
150
100
50
VMT(+121%)
Emissions (-32%)
on
Above: Total U.S. population, vehicle miles traveled, U.S. gross
domestic product, and aggregate emissions, 1970-1996.
1-3
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY1999 Final Annual Plan
To continue to reduce air pollution, the Clean
Air Act sets specific targets for the mitigation of
each air pollution problem and identifies specific
activities and a multi-year schedule for carrying
them out. The Act also requires the air quality
monitoring that helps us measure progress. In
addition, the Act also lays out a specific roadmap
for achieving those goals - what we the Agency and
our partners -- states and tribes - have to do to
clean up the air. One constant across the titles in the
Act is that the pollution control strategies and
programs it contains are all designed to get the most
cost-effective reductions early on. The early
reductions program in toxics, Phase 1 of the Acid
Rain program, and the MACT program were all
designed to achieve early reductions, making our air
cleaner and safer to breathe. The problems that
remain are some of the most difficult to solve.
We have developed strategies to address this
difficult increment and overcome the barriers that
have hindered progress in clean air in the past. We
will use the flexibility built into the Clean Air Act,
which is not wedded to hard and fast formulas or
specific technological requirements.
We will focus our efforts on:
Coupling ambitious goals with steady progress
- The emphasis will be on near-term actions
towards meeting the standards, while giving
states time to come up with more difficult
measures. We recognize that it will be difficult
for some areas of the country to attain the new
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
ozone and fine particles, and we believe it will
take more than an individual state's efforts to
achieve the needed emission reductions. We
will work with states and tribes to identify ways
to achieve interim reductions, principally
through regional strategies, national measures
and the air toxics and Acid Rain programs by
building on cross-pollutant emission reductions.
Using these strategies gets steady progress
toward the goal and for many areas will achieve
the goal. For those areas where additional
measures are required, this work will allow
steady progress toward the goal while giving
states the time to identify measures that will get
them that last increment to fully achieve the
goal.
Maintaining accountability with flexibility -
Ensuring that there is no backsliding in the
progress already made to meeting the Clean Air
goal is critical. We will also use the Act's
flexibility to develop the NOX Trading program
to build on the Acid Rain program to help states
and localities reduce emissions at the lowest
cost.
Fostering technical innovation where they
provide clear environmental benefits - Market-
based approaches provide "niches" for many
types of technologies; no one size will fit all.
Sources can improvise, innovate and otherwise
be creative in reducing emissions. We will
promote such technological innovation and men
disseminate it to others to show how they can
get needed reductions.
Building partnerships - There are numerous
forms of partnerships, all of which we have
used at one point or another in the Clean Air
Act: public outreach to educate people on the
air problems and encourage them to work to
solve them; Ozone Transport Assessment
Group (OTAG)-type groups to study a problem
and provide recommendations to EPA on ways
to solve it; working with organizations like the
National Academy of Sciences (NAS) on both
short-term and long-term research priorities;
and Regulatory Negotiations to bring in many
interested parties to work on a problem and
address a specific regulatory issue.
1-4
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY1999 Final Annual Plan
Research
The Agency is seeking to understand
further the root causes of the air toxics
environmental and human health problems in
urban areas, thereby improving the ability to
weigh alternative strategies for solving those
problems. Research will be devoted to the
development of currently unavailable health
effects and exposure information to determine
risk and develop alternative strategies for
maximizing risk reductions. We will be able to
model and characterize not only the current
toxics risk and compare national program
alternatives, but also to identify regional and
local "hot spots" and model alternative
strategies to assist states and localities in
solving their air and water toxics problems.
Using these strategies, we will work with areas
that have the worst problems to develop strategies
accounting for unique local conditions that may
hinder them from reaching attainment We will also
work with states/locals and tribes to ensure that
work they are doing on the PM and ozone standards
effectively targets both pollutants, as well as
regional haze, to maximize control strategies. On
the national level, we will continue to target source
characterization work, especially emission factors,
that is essential for the states, tribes and locals to
development strategies to meet the standards.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
Clean Air Act (CAA) and Amendments
1-5
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY1999 Final Annual Plan
Clean Air
Resource Summary
(Dollars in thousands)
Attain NAAQS for Ozone and PM
EPM
S&T
STAG
Reduce Emissions of Air Toxics
EPM
S&T
STAG
Attain NAAQS for
EPM
S&T
STAG
Acid Rain
EPM
S&T
STAG
CO,S02,NO2,Lead
Total Workyears:
FY1999
Pres. Budget
$525,639.6
$361,648.7
$86,102.3
$128,926.6
$146,619.8
$97,546.9
$52,651.7
$22,800.7
$22,094.5
$44,878.2
$16,750.5
$113.2
$28,014.5
$21,565.8
$13,035.8
$4,000.0
$4,530.0
1,777.1
FY1999
Enacted
$536^68.0
$384,863.2
$81,847.5
$147,060.1
$155,955.6
$90,700.3
$46,904.8
$21,551.4
$22,244.1
$42,184.1
$17,276.4
$113.2
$24,794.5
$18,620.4
$11,010.7
$4,002.1
$3,607.6
1,762.3
1-6
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency FY1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Attain NAAQS for Ozone and PM
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Particulate Matter Monitoring Network (non-grant)
Particulate Matter Monitoring Network Grants
Air, State, Local and Tribal Assistance Grants: Other Air Grants
Mobile Sources
Sustainable Development Challenge Grants
Resources moved to Goal 8/Office of the Administrator in FY1999
enacted
Urban Environmental Quality and Human Health
EMPACT
Tribal Capacity
Research: Tropospheric Ozone Research
Research: Particulate Matter Research
$25,000
$50,700
$95,920
$54,824
$7,687
$440
$3,537
$3,813
$19,763
$37,587
$25,000
$50,735
$155,867
$45,975
$0
$0
$2,622
$3,813
$20,083
$55,657
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
ONE-HOUR OZONE STANDARD REVOKED
By 1999: 8 additional areas currently classified as non-attainment will have the 1-hour ozone standard revoked
because they meet the old standard.
Performance Measures: Target:
Publish Notice Revoking 1-Hour Standard 8 Areas
National Guidance on Ozone SIP 1 Issued
States submit designations of areas for attainment of the ozone standards 5 0 States
1-7
-------
£7.5. Environmental Protection Agency /T1999 Final Annual Plan
Baseline: As a result of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,101 areas were designated non-attainment
for the 1-hour ozone standard. In 1998, as indicated in the 1997 air quality trends report, 38 areas were in non-
attainment. The trends are updated each year with a one-year lag time (i.e., the 2000 information will be
available in 2002).
PM-2.5 MONITORS
By 1999: Deploy PM-2.5 ambient monitors including: mass, continuous, speciation, and visibility sites
resulting in a total of 1500 monitoring sites.
Performance Measures: Target:
National Guidance on PM-2.5 SIP and Attainment Demonstration Requirements. 1 Issued
Cumulative total number of monitoring sites deployed. 1500 sites
Baseline: The Agency began working with the states to develop a PM-2.5 monitoring network in 1997 with
the first monitors put in place in 1998.
RESEARCH: PM HEALTH EFFECTS
By 1999: Identify and evaluate at least two plausible biological mechanisms by which PM causes death and
disease in humans.
Performance Measures: Target:
Reports (1) describing research designed to test a hypothesis about mechanisms of PM- 30-SEP-99
induced toxicity; 2) characterize factors affecting PM dosimetry in humans; 3) ID PM
characteristics (coposition) .
Baseline: Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently underway.
1-8
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency FY1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Reduce Emissions of Air Toxics
Key Programs
(Dollars in Thousands)
Air, State, Local and Tribal Assistance Grants: Other Air Grants
Federal Air Toxics Standards
Mobile Sources
EMPACT
Research: Air Toxics Research
99 Pres Bud
$22,095
$26,863
$1,768
$205
$21,015
99 Enacted
$22,244
$14,092
$1,736
$172
$19,682
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Am Toxic EMISSIONS
By 1999: Reduce air toxic emissions by 12% in FY 1999, resulting in a cumulative reduction of 25% from
1993 levels.
Performance Measures: Target:
Obtain data for building the 1999 National Toxics Inventory 1 Inventory
Air Toxics Emissions reduced from 1993 25 Percent
Baseline: In 1993, the last year before MACT standards and mobile source regulations developed
under the Clean Air Act were implemented, stationary and mobile sources emitted 3.7 million tons
of air toxics. In 1996, implementation of MACT standards decreased air toxic emissions by 0.7
million tons (20%) from 1993 emissions. Implementation of mobile source regulations (e.g.,
reformulated fuels) also decreased air toxics emissions. We revise air toxics emission data every
three years to generate inventories for 1993, 1996, 1999, etc with a lag time of approximately two
years (i.e., the 1999 inventory will be available in 2001).
1-9
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency JT1999 Final Annual Plan
RESEARCH: HEALTH ASSESSMENTS
By 1999: Complete Health Assessments for five air toxics to be indicated as high priority by the EPA and
regional offices.
Performance Measures: Target:
Complete four toxicologjcal reviews and assessments (RfC, RfD, cancer unit risks) of high 5 Assessments
priority to the Air Program
Baseline: Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently underway.
Strategic Objective: Attain NAAQS for CO, SO2, NO2, Lead
Key Programs
(Dollars in Thousands)
99 Pres Bud 99 Enacted
Air, State, Local and Tribal Assistance Grants: Other Air Grants $28,015 $24,795
Mobile Sources $113 $113
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
NAAQS
By 1999: Certify that 14 of the 58 estimated remaining non-attainment areas have achieved the NAAQS for
carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, or lead.
Performance Measures: Target:
Regions take Final Action on CO Re-designation 7 pmai Actions
Regions take Final Action on SO2 Re-designation 5 Final Actions
Regions take Final Action on Pb Re-designation 2 Final Actions
1-10
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency FY1999 Final Annual Plan
Baseline: As a result of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,48 areas were designated as non-attainment of the CO
standard. In 1996, as indicated in the most recent air trends report, 29 areas were non-attainment. Six areas have been re-
designated during 1997-1998. The air quality trends data is updated each year with a one-year lag time (i.e., the 2000
information will be available in 2002). As a result of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,54 areas were designated
as non-attainment of the SO2 standard. In 1996, as indicated in the most air recent trends, 34 areas were non-attainment.
The air quality trends data is updated each year with a one-year lag time (i.e., the 2000 information will be available in
2002). As a result of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,13 areas were designated as non-attainment of the lead
standard. In 1996, as indicated in the most recent air trends report, 10 areas were in non-attainment. The air quality
trends data is updated each year with a one-year lag time (i.e., the 2000 information will be available in 2002). There is
one area in non-attainment for NOx.
Strategic Objective: Acid Rain
Key Programs
(Dollars in Thousands)
Air, State, Local and Tribal Assistance Grants:
Acid Rain -Program Implementation
Acid Rain -CASTNet
Other Air Grants
99 Pres Bud
$4,530
$3,502
$4,000
99 Enacted
$3,608
$9,951
$4,000
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
EMISSIONS REDUCTION
By 1999: Maintain 4 million tons of sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions reductions from utility sources, and
maintain 300,000 tons of nitrogen oxides (NOx) reductions from coal-fired utility sources.
Performance Measures: Target:
SO2 Emissions 4,000,000 Tons Reduced
NOx Reductions 300,000 Tons Reduced
Baseline: The base of comparison for assessing progress on the 2000 annual performance goals is emissions
levels before implementation of Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments in 1990. Emissions levels that
would have resulted without implementation of Title IV of the CAAA were based on projection inventories of
NOx emissions assuming growth without controls.
1-11
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY1999 Final Annual Plan
EXTERNAL FACTORS
Federal and state government agencies, industry
and individuals must work together to achieve
the goal of healthy, clean air. Success is far
from guaranteed. Much remains to be done if the
health and environmental improvement targets in the
Clean Air goal are to be achieved. Meeting the goal
depends on a strong partnership between the states
and EPA. States will play a pivotal role by
providing information and working with EPA on
standard setting.
A variable that we have to consider in
developing programs to achieve the Clean Air goal
is the weather. In developing their clean air
strategies, states and locals consider the normal
meteorological patterns. However, a hot, dry
summer may prevent areas from gaining the three
full years of clean air data needed to gain
attainment.
Additionally, clean air strategies attempt to
predict changing demographics, transportation
patterns, impacts of urban sprawl and industrial
demands; an increase or large shift in any of these
areas can significantly impact air quality.
Accomplishing the Acid Rain objective's target
for a decrease in ambient concentration and
deposition of nitrates assumes that other sources of
nitrogen oxides (e.g. mobile sources) do not grow
at a faster rate than currently projected. The Acid
Rain program is also affected by demand for electric
power and the fuels used by electric utilities.
Because air pollution crosses local and state
lines and in some cases, crosses our borders with
Canada and Mexico, the problems are both national
and international in scope. Successfully achieving
clean air goals will require extensive multi-state and
even multi-country planning, coordination and
implementation efforts.
Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) testing through
the HAP Test Rule is also critical for development
of cancer and non-cancer dose-response assessments
as part of the Urban Air Toxics Strategy which
seeks to reduce risk of the 30 HAPs presenting the
greatest threat to public health. Without this
fundamental data, toxic emission reduction and
subsequent risk reduction to the American
population could be significantly delayed.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Attain NAAQS for Ozone and PM
Data sources:
EPA Aerometric and Information Retrieval
System (AIRS) Air Quality Subsystem;
EPA National Emission Trends Database;
EPA Findings and Required Elements Data
System (FREDS);
IMPROVE database.
Data from the AIRS Air Quality Subsystem are
used to determine if non-attainment areas have
the requisite three years of clean air data
needed for re-designation. The National Emission
Trends database is used to determine if the states
have reduced their VOC, PM2.S, and NOX emissions.
The FREDS system tracks the progress of states
and Regions in reviewing and approving the
required elements of the state implementation plans
also needed for re-designation to attainment. The
1-12
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY1999 Final Annual Plan
IMPROVE database provides data on visibility
improvement from various sites nationally.
The EPA's highway vehicle emission factor
model, MOBILE, provides average in-use fleet
emission factors for three criteria pollutants:
Volatile Organic Compounds (V OC), CO and NOX
for each of the categories of vehicles under various
conditions affecting in-use emission levels (e.g.,
ambient temperatures, average traffic speeds,
gasoline volatility) as specified by the model user.
It is used by EPA in evaluating control strategies
for highway mobile sources, by states and other
local and regional planning agencies in the
development of emission inventories and control
strategies for State Implementation Plans (SIPs)
under the Clean Air Act.
The model has been periodically updated to
reflect the collection and analysis of additional
emission factor testing results over the years, as well
as changes in vehicle, engine, and emission control
system technologies, changes in applicable
regulations and emission standards and test
procedures, and improved understanding of in-use
emission levels and the factors that influence them.
Program audits assess the effectiveness of
Inspection/maintenance (I/M) programs by
evaluating their operations, ability to identify
pollutants, and success in ensuring the repair of
vehicles. EPA also tracks the number of states
implementing the programs and completion of the
National Highway System Designation Act
(NHSDA) program evaluations.
For the Reformulated Fuels Gasoline (RFG)
program, the reporting system collects data on
quality for RFG and conventional gasoline to
determine fuel program benefits. The system
electronically processes approximately 100,000 fuel
quality reports. The electronic data interchange was
recognized in the President's report on Reinventing
Government as a dramatic new industry reporting
initiative.
For modeling, the verification system is the
MOBILE highway vehicle emission factors model.
The Agency will continue utilizing the testing
results, number of labels and certificates issued for
the compliance programs and testing programs.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control (OA/QC)
procedures:
The QA/QC of the national air monitoring
program has several major components: the Data
Quality Objective (DQO) process, reference and
equivalent methods program, the precision and
accuracy of the collected data, EPA's National
Performance Audit Program (NPAP), systems
audits, and network reviews. To ensure quality data,
the State and Local Air Monitoring Sites (SLAMS)
are required to meet the following: 1) each site must
meet network design and siting criteria; 2) each site
must provide adequate QA assessment, control and
corrective action functions according to minimum
program requirements; 3) all sampling methods and
equipment must meet EPA reference or equivalent
requirements; 4) acceptable data validation and
record keeping procedures must be followed; and 5)
data from the SLAMS must be summarized and
reported annually to EPA.
There are additional quality assurance/quality
control measures specified for the collection of
particulate data, such as the Federal Reference
Method Performance Evaluation Program, co-
located samples, and field and laboratory blanks.
Finally, there are systems audits that regularly
review the overall air quality data collection activity
for any needed changes or corrections.
Plans to Improve Data:
The emissions data are difficult to quality
assure because of the varying methods of
determining the total emissions in a given area, hi
the future, EPA will post all state, tribal, and local
agency emissions data in a compiled data base so
that all stakeholders can provide a much more
1-13
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY1999 Final Annual Plan
intense review of the inventory. Also, the Emissions
Inventory Improvement Project (ESP) provides
consistent methods of estimating emissions data and
developed consistent quality assurance methods for
use by the states to substantially improve state
emissions data. Emissions data for the HEP are
subject to enhanced quality assurance before they
are entered into an air quality model. In addition,
preliminary air quality model results identify
specific weaknesses in the emissions inputs.
The IMPROVE network will be enhanced by
the upgrade of 30 existing IMPROVE samplers and
the establishment of 78 new sites in 1998 and 1999.
The new sites established in 1998 and 1999 will
provide additional information on class 1 areas
previously not covered in the IMPROVE monitoring
network.
Research
EPA has several strategies to validate and
verify performance measures in the area of
environmental science and technology research.
Because the major output of research is technical
information, primarily in the form of reports,
software, and protocols, the key to these strategies
is the performance of both peer reviews and quality
reviews to ensure that requirements are met.
Peer reviews provide assurance during the pre-
planning, planning, and reporting of environmental
science and research activities that the work meets
peer expectations. Only those science activities and
resulting information products that pass Agency
peer review are addressed and published. This
applies to program-level, project-level, and research
outputs. The quality of the peer review activity is
monitored by EPA to ensure that peer reviews are
performed consistently, according to Agency policy,
and that any identified areas of concern are resolved
through discussion or the implementation of
corrective action.
The Agency's expanded focus on peer review
helps ensure that the performance measures listed
here are verified and validated by an external
organization. This is accomplished through the use
of the Science Advisory Board (SAB) and the Board
of Scientific Counselors (BOSC). The BOSC,
established under the Federal Advisory Committee
Act, provides an added measure of assurance by
examining the way the Agency uses peer review, as
well as the management of its research and
development laboratories.
hi 1998, the Agency presented a new Agency-
wide quality system in Agency Order 5360.1/chg 1.
This system provided policy to ensure that all
environmental programs performed by or for the
Agency be supported by individual quality systems
that comply fully with the American National
Standard, Specifications and Guidelines for
Quality Systems for Environmental Data
Collection and Environmental Technology
Programs (ANSI/ASQC E4-1994).
The order expanded the applicability of quality
assurance and quality control to the design,
construction, and operation by EPA organizations of
environmental technology such as pollution control
and abatement systems; treatment, storage, and
disposal systems; and remediation systems. This
rededication to quality provides the needed
management and technical practices to assure that
environmental data developed in research and used
to support Agency decisions are of adequate quality
and usability for their intended purpose.
A quality assurance system is implemented at
all levels in the EPA research organization. The
Agency-wide quality assurance system is a
management system that provides the necessary
elements to plan, implement, document, and assess
the effectiveness of quality assurance and quality
control activities applied to environmental programs
conducted by or for EPA. This quality management
system provides for identification of environmental
programs for which Quality Assurance/Quality
Control (QA/QC) is needed, specification of the
1-14
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY1999 Final Annual Plan
quality of the data required from environmental
programs, and provision of sufficient resources to
assure that an adequate level of QA/QC is
performed.
Agency measurements are based on the
application of standard EPA and American Society
for Testing and Materials (ASTM) methodology as
well as performance-based measurement systems.
Non-standard methods are validated at the project
level. Internal and external management system
assessments report the efficacy of the management
system for quality of the data and the final research
results. The quality assurance annual report and
work plan submitted by each organizational unit
provides an accountable mechanism for quality
activities. Continuous improvement in the quality
system is accomplished through discussion and
review of assessment results.
The Office of Research and Development
Management Information System (OMIS) will be
another accountability tool used to monitor and
track performance measures. The GPRA structure
will be incorporated into OMIS to ensure consistent
maintenance and reporting, resulting in greater
accuracy and consistency of information to users.
Reduce Emissions of Air Toxics
Data sources include:
EPA's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI);
National Toxic Inventory (NTT);
Aerometric Information Retrieval System
(AIRS)
MACTRAX
EVENTS
The NTI houses emissions estimates for
hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). Currently, we
have completed a 1993 base-year NTI and are
developing estimates for the 1996 NTI. Both
contain emissions estimates for major area and
mobile source categories, but at different levels of
detail.
The main improvement in the 1996 version will
be the addition of facility-specific parameters that
will make the inventory useful for dispersion
modeling. To date, we have collected emission
inventory data to update the NTI from:
(1) emissions data gathered to support
development of MACT standards for
source categories, which are required to be
promulgated within two, four, seven, and
ten years of enactment of the 1990 Clean
Air Act amendments;
(2) The externally and internally peer-
reviewed national inventories undertaken
to support regulation of seven specific
HAPs requiring standards under section
112(c)(6) and 40 HAPs pursuant to
section 112(k);
(3) State and local inventories (34 states);
(4) TRI, which consists of data submitted by
facilities and required under Right-To-
Know legislation.
All of the above data sources rely on estimation
techniques since emission testing at every facility
would be resource intensive. Often data from
source tests are extrapolated to other similar
sources, hi addition to source testing, other
estimation techniques include material balances, and
emission factors (e.g., pounds throughput per year).
For source categories for which we have no data, we
generally develop emissions data using emission
factors and activity level.
An update of the 1993 NTI was completed in
October 1998, including a complete compilation of
MACT baseline emissions data for two-year, four-
year, seven-year, and the majority of ten-year source
categories. We also plan to complete the
1-15
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY1999 Final Annual Plan
compilation of 1996 NTI draft major and mobile
source data. The 1996 NTI, including internal and
external review, will be completed by September 30,
1999.
MACTRAX provides a mechanism to track the
air implementation activities by each state to insure
that the emission reductions expected from the
development of MACT standards can be realized
through full implementation of the standards. The
EVENTS tracking system provides a means to track
the proposal and promulgation of air toxics MACT
and other regulations.
We plan to deploy Phase 1 of the national air
toxics network by March 1999. At a minimum
there will be 17 monitors in 1999, increasing to 40
monitors in 2000. Depending on how the resources
are distributed (sites chosen, pollutants monitored,
etc.), the number of monitors reporting as part of the
national air toxics network could be substantially
more than the numbers above.
OA/OC Procedures
Procedures for QA/QC of emission and ambient
air toxics data are not as institutionalized as those
used for the criteria pollutant program. Air toxics
data are not currently required of states, but are
submitted voluntarily. EPA does review the data to
assure data quality and consistency, but no formal
procedures are in place for quality assurance.
Regional offices review all MACTRAX data before
it is placed in the system. EPA sends the NTI data
to states for their review and incorporates state
comments and data into the system. Procedures are
now being finalized to assure the quality of
emissions inventory data collected from industry,
which is used for the development of technology-
based emission standards.
At present, we are developing Data Quality
Objectives (DQOs), Quality Assurance Plans
(QAPs), and a network design document for the
national ambient air toxics network, which will be
transmitted to the states and Regions to help design
and deploy the network. When completed, these
documents will help answer questions on the
interpretations and limitations of the data collected
from this network.
Mobile source data are validated by using
speciated test data from the mobile source emission
factor program, along with peer reviewed models
which estimate national tons for the relevant year of
interest.
Data Limitations:
The 1996 NTI will be the first EPA effort to
estimate not only HAP emissions on a national
scale, but also to associate source-specific
parameters necessary .for modeling such as location
and facility characteristics (stack height, exit
velocity, temperature, etc.) to emissions. The
compilation of this huge amount of data presents a
significant challenge to EPA. Since HAP estimates
have not previously been required, current data are
limited and new methodologies for estimating
emissions are necessary.
A total of 34 states voluntarily compiled and
delivered HAP 1996 emissions inventories to EPA.
Because states are not subject to reporting
requirements, these state data vary in completeness,
format, and quality. The majority of state data is
likely to be based on emissions estimation as
opposed to direct measurement.
The EPA is evaluating and supplementing the
state data with emissions data gathered during the
development of MACT standards and with TRI
data. Estimates obtained from regulatory
development programs such as MACT are accepted
as the best available data for the inventory because
they are based on recent test data, control
information, representative modeling scenarios, and
input from industry and EPA experts. The TRI data
used to supplement the NTI is likely also to be
based on estimations and is limited in that data is
1-16
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY1999 Final Annual Plan
submitted by thousands of individual facilities
whose submissions are not quality assured and who
may have differing estimation methods and
interpretations of TRI reporting requirements. For
sources not included in the state inventories, MACT
data, or TRI, and for states with no data submittals,
EPA estimates air toxic emissions by using emission
factors and corresponding activity data.
Although emission factors are not intended for
estimations of emissions on a source-specific basis,
EPA believes it is appropriate to use such factors in
a national inventory covering a large number of
sources. However, tins does not provide a complete
solution because there are not emissions factors
developed for all source categories that emit HAPs.
Plans to Improve Data:
The emissions data are hard to quality assure
because of the varying methods of determining the
total emissions in a given area. In the future, we
will post all state emissions data in a compiled data
base so that states and other interested parties can
provide a much more intense review of the
inventory. The Emissions Inventory Improvement
Program (EIDP) provides consistent methods of
estimating emissions and is another method for
developing better state emissions data. We prepared
air toxics emissions inventory guidance for state and
local agencies in 1998.
We document all emission estimates in the
1996 NTI so users of the data can determine how
each estimate was developed. In order to improve
the 1996 NTI data, we plan to provide the data to
states and other interested parties for external
review, incorporate additional state and MACT
data, and continue gap-filling. In 1999, we will
conduct internal QA/QC to improve the data.
Specific internal activities will include evaluation of
state data, MACT data and TRI data for individual
facilities and a comparison of air toxics data to
VOC/PM data.
Research
(See above Research section under Attain NAAQS
for Ozone and PM.)
Attain NAAQS for CO, SO2, NO2,
Lead
Data sources:
EPA AIRS Air Quality Subsystem;
EPA National Emission Trends Database;
EPA Flexible Regional Emissions Data System.
Data from the National Emission Trends
Database and the AIRS Air Quality Subsystem are
used to determine if non-attainment areas have the
requisite three years of clean air data needed for re-
designation. The National Emission Trends
database will be used to determine if the states have
reduced their CO, SO2, and lead emissions. The
Findings and Required Elements Data System
(FREDS) system tracks the progress of states and
Regions in reviewing and approving the required
elements of the state implementation plans also
needed for re-designation to attainment.
OA/OC procedures:
The QA/QC of the national air monitoring
program has several major components: the Data
Quality Objective process, reference and equivalent
methods program, the precision and accuracy of the
collected data, EPA's National Performance Audit
Program (NPAP), systems audits, and network
reviews.
To ensure quality data, the State/Local Air
Monitoring System (SLAMS) is required to meet
the following: 1) each site must meet network design
and siting criteria; 2) each site must provide
adequate QA assessment, control, and corrective
action functions according to minimum program
requirements; 3) all sampling methods and
1-17
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY1999 Final Annual Plan
equipment must meet EPA reference or equivalent
requirements; 4) acceptable data validation and
record keeping procedures must be followed; and 5)
data from the SLAMS must be summarized and
reported annually to EPA.
Plans to Improve Data:
The emissions data are hard to quality assure
because of the varying methods of determining the
total emissions in a given area, hi the future, EPA
will post all state, tribal, and local emissions data in
a compiled data base so that all interested parties
can provide a much more intense review of the
inventory. The Emission Inventory Improvement
Program (EUP), which provides consistent methods
of estimating emissions data and developed
consistent quality assurance methods for use by the
states, will improve the quality of state emissions
data.
Since the dominant source of CO emissions is
on-road mobile sources, the best means of
improving the quality of the emission estimates is to
provide precise inputs to the MOBILE model (used
to calculate mobile source emission factors) and
develop more precise estimates of Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT). These two inputs (emission
factors and VMT) determine the emissions from on-
road mobile sources.
Acid Rain
The Acid Rain program performance data are
some of the most accurate data collected by the EPA
because the data for most sources (all coal-fired
sources) consists of actual monitored, instead of
estimated, emissions. The emissions data is
collected through continuous emissions monitors
(CEMS) and electronically transferred directly into
EPA's Emissions Tracking System (ETS). Actual
emissions of S02, NOX and CO2 are measured for
each unit/boiler within a plant. The ETS allows EPA
to track actual reductions for each unit, as well as
aggregate emissions by all power plants and
affected industrial facilities. A principal output of
the ETS is the publication of quarterly and annual
emission reports based on emissions monitoring
data. The ETS quarterly and annual reports include
summary statistics for SO2, NO*, CO2 and
emissions.
OA/OC procedures:
The Acid Rain program also tracks indicators
which validate the quality of the emissions data,
such as the accuracy of the monitors achieved during
certification testing. There are four validation
measures that help to demonstrate the high quality
of the data collected: the number of CEMS
certified; the percentage of CEMS that meet the
10% relative accuracy standard; the percentage of
CEMS that exceed the 7.5% relative accuracy
target; and, the number of quarterly reports
processed.
1-18
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Goal: Clean and Safe Water
All Americans will have drinking water that is clean and safe to drink. Effective protection of America's
rivers, lakes, wetlands, aquifers, and coastal and ocean waters will sustain fish, plants, and wildlife, as well as
recreational, subsistence, and economic activities. Watersheds and their aquatic ecosystems will be restored and
protected to improve public health, enhance water quality, reduce flooding, and provide habitat for wildlife.
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
Safe and clean water is needed for drinking,
recreation, fishing, maintaining ecosystem
integrity, and commercial uses such as
agricultural and industrial production.
Our health, economy, and quality of life depend
on reliable sources of clean and safe water.
Waterfowl, fish, and other aquatic life that live in
and on the water, as well as plants, animals, and
other life forms in terrestrial ecosystems are
dependent on clean water.
While the nation has made considerable
progress over the past 25 years, some waters still do
not meet current Clean Water Act standards.
The 1996 National Water Quality Inventory
Report to Congress indicates that 16 percent of
assessed rivers and streams and 35 percent of
assessed lake acres are not safe for fish
consumption.
Twenty (20) percent of assessed rivers and
streams and 25 percent of lake acres are not safe for
recreational activities (e.g, swimming). Finally, 16
percent of assessed rivers and streams and 8 percent
of lake acres are not meeting drinking water
standards. Many of the remaining challenges
require a different approach to environmental
protection because they are not amenable to
traditional end-of-pipe pollution controls. These
problems are generally the result of human
activities.
EPA needs to motivate people to be responsible
in their day-to-day decisions that affect the quality
of their rivers, streams, lakes, wetlands, and
estuaries.
M EANS AND STRATEGY
To help achieve the Nation's clean and safe water
goal, EPA will expand implementation of the
watershed approach in carrying out its statutory
authorities under the Safe Drinking Water Act
Amendments of 1996 and the Clean Water Act
Protecting watersheds involves participation by
a wide variety of stakeholders, a comprehensive
assessment of the condition of the watershed, and
implementation of solutions based on the
assessment of conditions and stakeholder input.
Full involvement of stakeholders at all levels of
government, the regulated community, and the
public are fundamental to the watershed approach.
The watershed approach helps EPA, its federal
partners, states, tribes, local governments, and other
stakeholders to implement tailored solutions and
maximize the benefits gained from the use of
increasingly scarce resources.
The Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of
1996 charted a new and challenging course for EPA,
H-l
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
states, tribes, and water suppliers. One of the
central provisions of the Amendments is a
significantly strengthened source water protection
program, which builds directly on the watershed
approach. Other provisions include new
requirements for establishing drinking water safely
standards, which place emphasis on microbiological
contaminant^ disinfectant and disinfection
byproducts (DBFs), and other pollutants identified
as posing potentially high risks.
The Amendments also established a new
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF)
program to assist public water systems in meeting
drinking water standards. They also provided for
assistance to small systems to build or strengthen
technical, managerial, and financial capacity. Finally
they established an operator certification program
and require "right-to-know" reports for all
customers of public water systems.
EPA has increased its efforts to provide tools
and information to assist states and tribes in
protecting their residents from health risks
associated with contaminated recreational waters
and non-commercially caught fish. These tools will
help reduce health risks including risks to sensitive
populations, such as children and subsistence and
recreational anglers.
EPA activities include development of criteria,
enhanced fish tissue monitoring, risk assessment,
and development offish and shellfish consumption
advisories. EPA will also establish improved safety
guidelines and pollution indicators so that local
authorities can monitor their recreational waters in
a cost-effective way and close them to public use
when necessary to protect human health.
For beaches, EPA's three-part strategy is to
strengthen beach standards and testing, improve the
scientific basis for beach assessment, and develop
methods to inform the public about beach
conditions.
Under the Clean Water Act, EPA will continue
to develop scientifically-based water quality
standards and criteria and work with its partners to
apply them on a watershed basis. EPA will work
with states and tribes to improve implementation of
total maximum daily load (TMDL) programs that
establish the analytical basis for watershed-based
decisions. These decisions address the need for
additional pollution reductions where standards are
not being met in watersheds.
EPA will continue to develop and revise
national effluent guideline limitations and standards,
manage the Clean Water State Revolving Fund
(CWSRF) program and other funding mechanisms,
and streamline the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit program.
EPA will also continue reorienting all its point
source programs to focus and coordinate efforts on
a watershed basis.
H-2
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
The 1996 Clean Water Needs Survey estimates
the Nation's water infrastructure financing need at
almost $140 billion. The CWSRF is a significant
financial tool for addressing this need and achieving
clean and safe water. With over $13 billion worth
of capitalization grants, all 50 states and U.S.
territories have benefited from this and other
wastewater funding.
EPA has stepped up efforts to
engage a variety of stakeholders to
reduce nutrients, pathogens, and other
pollutants from nontraditional categories
of point sources, including animal
feeding operations, storm water drains,
sanitary sewer overflows, and combined
sewer overflows. In addition, EPA is
continuing to increase and advocate the
use of CWSRF funds for eligible
nonpoint source and estuary projects.
EPA is assisting states and tribes to
characterize risks, rank priorities, and
implement a mix of voluntary and
regulatory approaches through state
nonpoint source management programs.
State and tribal nonpoint source
programs are being strengthened to
ensure that beneficial uses of water are
achieved and maintained.
States will continue to implement
coastal nonpoint source programs
approved by EPA and the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
under the Coastal Zone Act
Reauthorization Amendments.
States will also work with the U.S.
Department of Agriculture to promote
implementation of Farm Bill programs
consistent with state nonpoint source
management needs and priorities. EPA
will also provide tools to states to assess
and strengthen controls on air deposition
sources of nitrogen, mercury, and other toxics.
With respect to wetlands, EPA will work with
federal, state, tribal, local, and private sector
partners on protection and community-based
restoration of wetlands, and with its federal partners
to avoid, minimize, and compensate for wetland
losses through the Clean Water Act Section 404 and
Honpolnt Source
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Farm Bill programs.
The President's Clean Water Action Plan,
announced in February 1998, calls for more than
100 specific key actions by EPA and other federal
agencies with either water quality responsibilities or
activities that have an impact on water quality.
These key actions cover most aspects of the
water program at EPA. The Action Plan mobilizes
federal, state, and local agencies to work together to
achieve the Nation's clean water goals through the
watershed approach, brings a sharp
focus to the critical actions that are
required, and establishes deadlines for
meeting these commitments over the
next several years.
treated water in the distribution system and
preventing the intrusion of microbial contamination.
Research to support the development of
ecological criteria will improve our understanding of
the structure, function and characteristics of aquatic
systems, and will evaluate exposures to stressors
and their effects on those systems. This research
can then be used to improve risk assessment
methods to develop aquatic life, habitat, and wildlife
criteria. The Agency also will develop cost effective
technologies for managing contaminated sediments
Research
EPA's research efforts will
continue to strengthen the scientific
basis for drinking water standards
through the use of improved methods
and new data to better evaluate the
risks associated with exposure to
chemical and microbial contaminants in
drinking water. To support the Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and its
1996 Amendments, the Agency's
drinking water research program will
develop dose-response information on
DBPs, waterbome pathogens, arsenic
and other drinking water contaminants
for characterization of potential
exposure risks from consuming tap
water. Research will also include
increasing the focus on filling key data
gaps and developing methods for
chemicals and microbial pathogens.
The Agency will develop and evaluate
cost-effective treatment technologies for removing
pathogens from water supplies while minimizing
DBP formation, and for maintaining the quality of
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
Clean Air Act
Clean Air Act Amendments (CAA)
Clean Vessel Act
Clean Water Act (CWA)
Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act of 1990
Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act(CERCLA)
Endangered Species Act
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement
Marine Plastic Pollution, Research and Control Act (MPPRCA) of
1987
Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA)
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
National Invasive Species Act of 1996
North American Wetlands Conservation Act
Ocean Dumping Ban Act of 1988
Pollution Prevention Act (PPA)
Ramsar Convention on Wetlands (1971)
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
Shore Protection Act of 1988
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
Water Resource Development Act (WRDA)
with an emphasis on identifying innovative in situ
solutions. EPA will continue to develop diagnostic
tools to evaluate the exposures to toxic constituents
H-4
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
of wet weather flows, and develop and validate
effective watershed management strategies for
controlling wet weather flows, especially when they
are high volume and toxic. This research will also
develop effective beach evaluation tools necessary
to make timely and informed decisions on beach
advisories and closures.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in thousands)
Clean and Safe Water
Safe Drinking Water, Fish and Recreational Waters
EPM
S&T
STAG
Conserve and Enhance Nation's Waters
EPM
S&T
STAG
Reduce Loadings and Air Deposition
EPM
S&T
STAG
Total Workyears:
FY1999
Pres. Budget
$2,815^08.5
$1,026,835.1
$101,726.1
$45,828.5
$879,280.5
$300,672.5
$135,543.9
$15,599.3
$149,529.3
$1,487,800.9
$127,453.8
$7347.1
$1353,000.0
2,465.9
FY1999
Enacted
$3,418,339.7
$1,092,624.2
$110,067.9
$49,847.0
$932,709.5
$339,236.8
$166,215.1
$19,492.4
$153,529.3
$1,986,478.7
$133,781.6
$8376.1
$1,844321.0
2,496.1
II-5
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Safe Drinking Water, Fish and
Recreational Waters
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Drinking Water Regulations $38,860 $33,886
Drinking Water Implementation $30,917 $31,688
UIC Program $11,269 $11,745
Rural Water Technical Assistance $232 $9,955
State PWSS Grants $93,781 $93,781
State Underground Injection Control Grants $10,500 $10,500
Source Water Protection (CWAP-related) $13,001 $11,686
Water Infrastructure :Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DW-SRF) $775,000 $775,000
EMPACT $769 $1,291
Environmental Justice $881 $881
Research: Safe Drinking Water Research $43,702 $47,728
Project XL $391 $391
H-6
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
DRINKING WATER HEALTH STANDARDS
By 1999: 89% (an increase of 1% over 1998) of the population served by community water systems will
receive drinking water meeting all health-based standards, in effect as of 1994, up from 83% in 1994.
Performance Measures:
Target:
Population served by CWSs that will receive drinking water for which there have been no 89% Population
violations during the year of any federally enforceable health-based standard that were in
place by 1994.
Baseline: In 1994, 83% of the population that was served by community water systems received drinking
water meeting all health-based standards. Note that a recent recalculation of the baseline for 1994 has resulted
in a baseline that is 2% higher than that reported in the FY 1999 President's Budget.
Percent of Population Served By Community Water
Systems that Meet all Health based Standards
n-7
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency J999 Final Annual Plan
STANDARDS FOR DRINKING WATER CONTAMINANTS
By 1999: EPA will issue and begin implementing two protective drinking water standards for high- risk
contaminants, including disease-causing micro-organisms (Stage I Disinfection/Disinfection Byproducts and
Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rules).
Performance Measures: Target:
Regulations promulgated that establish protective levels for high-risk contaminants 2 Rules
Baseline: These are new regulations.
SOURCE WATER PROTECTION
By 1999: 4,400 community water systems will be implementing programs to protect their source water (an
increase of 1,650 systems over 1998).
Performance Measures: Target:
CWSs with ground or surface water protection programs in place 4,400 CWSs
Baseline: In 1998,2,750 community water systems implemented programs to protect their source water
resources.
RESEARCH: CRITICAL DOSE-RESPONSE DATA
By 1999: EPA will develop critical dose-response data for disinfectant by-products (DBPs), waterbome
pathogens, and arsenic for addressing key uncertainties in the risk assessment of municipal water supplies.
Performance Measures: Target:
Data on first city study on microbial enteric disease. 30-SEP-99
Complete hazard i.d./screening studies on reproductive/developmental effects of selected 30-SEP-99
DBPs.
Baseline: Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently underway.
II-8
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Conserve and Enhance Nation's
Waters
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
Water Quality Criteria and Standards (CWAP)
Wetlands (CWAP)
National Estuaries Program (CWAP)
South Florida (Everglades) (CWAP)
Chesapeake Bay (CWAP)
Great Lakes (CWAP)
Gulf of Mexico (CWAP)
Long Island Sound (CWAP)
Pfiesteria (CWAP)
Pacific Northwest (CWAP)
Lake Champlain (CWAP)
State Pollution Control Grants (Section 106) (CWAP)
State Water Quality Cooperative Agreements (CWAP)
State Wetlands Program Grants (CWAP)
EMPACT
1999 Pres Bud
$19,670
$17,489
$16,399
$3,076
$18,880
$6,355
$4,284
$500
$500
$821
$1,000
$115,529
$19,000
$15,000
$0
1999 Enacted
$17,843
$16,111
$16,544
$3,099
$19,630
$5,382
$3,799
$900
$2,500
$714
$2,000
$115,529
$19,000
$15,000
$649
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
UNIFIED WATERSHED ASSESSMENTS
By 1999: As part of the Clean Water Action Plan, all states will be conducting or have completed unified
watershed assessments, with support from EPA, to identify aquatic resources in greatest need of restoration or
prevention activities.
H-9
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Performance Measures: Target:
States that are conducting or have completed unified watershed assessments 50 States
Baseline: This is the first time Unified Watershed Assessments have been done. The baseline is zero.
WATERSHED RESTORATION
By 1999: EPA will provide funding to restore wetlands and river corridors in 30 watersheds that meet specific
"Five Star Project" criteria relating to diverse community partnerships (for a cumulative total of 44
watersheds).
Performance Measures: Target:
Watersheds/community-based wetlands/river corridors restoration projects funded by 44 Watersheds
EPA's STAR Program. (Cumulative total).
Baseline: As of August 1998, EPA co-operated on and supported wetland and river corridor projects in 14
watersheds. The Five-Star Restoration Challenge Grant Program is an outgrowth of President
Clinton's Clean Water Action Plan. The program is open to any public or private entity and
provides modest financial assistance to support community- based wetland/riparian restoration
projects and locally-based, natural resource stewardship.
RESEARCH: AQUATIC STRESSORS
By 1999: EPA will provide data and information for use by states and regions in assessing and managing
aquatic stressors in the watershed, to reduce toxic loadings and improve ecological risk assessment.
Performance Measures: Target:
Develop and provide a research strategy for integrating economic assessment with 30-SEP-99
ecological risk assessment of multiple aquatic stressors applied at two locations.
Baseline: Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently underway.
n-io
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Find Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Reduce Loadings and Air
Deposition
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Rural Water Technical Assistance $ 1,456 $3,095
Effluent Guidelines (CWAP) $23,716 $22,366
NPDES Program (CWAP) $43,409 $35,142.8
State Nonpoint Source Grants (CWAP) $200,000 $200,000
National Nonpoint Source Program Implementation (CWAP) $15,076 $15,477
Water Infrastructure: Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CW-SRF) $1,075,000 $1,350,000
Water Infrastructure: Alaska Native Villages $15,000 $30,000
Water Infrastructure: Boston Harbor $50,000 $50,000
Water Infrastructure: Bristol County $3,000 $2,610
Water Infrastructure: New Orleans $10,000 $6,525
Sustainable Development Challenge Grants $2,015 $0*
Urban Environmental Quality and Human Health $815 $0
Project XL $174 $174
Common Sense Initiative $1,339 $0
Research: Watershed Research $7,347 $8,376
*Resources in 1999 Enacted Budget were transferred to Goal 8
11-11
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
SECONDARY TREATMENT OF WASTEWATER
By 1999: Another 3.4 million people will receive the benefits of secondary treatment of wastewater, for a total
of 179 million.
Performance Measures:
Additional people who will receive the benefits of secondary or better treatment of
wastewater
Target:
3.4 M People
Baseline: In July 1998,175.5 million people were receiving secondary treatment of wastewater according to
EPA's Clean Water Needs Survey Database. Note that the cumulative total (179 million people) reflects
revised estimates.
U.S. POPULATION SERVED BY SECONDARY
TREATMENT OR BETTER
200
ISO
= 100
50
Year
n-i2
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ;ppp Final Annual Plan
COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOWS/STORM WATER CONTROLS
By 1999: More than 220 communities will have local watersheds improved by controls on combined sewer
overflows and storm water.
Performance Measures: Target:
Communities that will have local watersheds improved by controls on CSOs and storm 220
water Communities
Baseline: No baseline information exists prior to FY 1999.
NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAMS
By 1999: In support of the Clean Water Action Plan, 10 additional states will upgrade their nonpoint source
programs, to ensure that they are implementing dynamic and effective nonpoint source programs that are
designed to achieve and maintain beneficial uses of water.
Performance Measures: Target:
States and Territories that have upgraded their NFS programs (incorporating the 9 key 10 States
elements outlined in national grant guidance), thereby ensuring implementation of an
effective program.
Baseline: hi 1998,2 states upgraded their nonpoint source programs.
RESEARCH: WATERSHED MANAGEMENT TOOLS
By 2003: Deliver support tools, such as watershed models, enabling resource planners to select consistent,
appropriate watershed management solutions and alternative, less costly wet-weather flow control technologies.
Performance Measures: Target:
Model Linking Urban Stonnwater Management Models and Geographic Information 30-SEP-OO
System (GIS).
Baseline: Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently underway.
11-13
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
EXTERNAL FACTORS
Drinking Water and Source Water
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
Amendments of 1996 comprise one of the first
environmentally-focused statutes to establish
not only regulatory, programmatic, enforcement, and
management/administration provisions to ensure
that safe drinking water is available nationwide, but
also establishes an outreach process to involve all
stakeholders in the development and implementation
of the statutory provisions. To date, this extensive
stakeholder involvement has had major benefits on
the Agency's efforts in implementing the 1996
SDWA amendments. To listen to our stakeholders,
incorporate their views, and keep the process
moving, while focusing on our mutual goal of public
health protection has taken the meaning of
partnership to a new level. The complexity of
upcoming regulations and the time-consuming
process of gaining consensus with stakeholders pose
challenges in implementing the 1996 SDWA
amendments.
The adoption of health-based and other
programmatic regulations by the states is another
area of concern. Since states have primary
enforcement authority (primacy) for drinking water
regulations, it is critical that the states have
sufficient staff and resources to work with public
water systems to ensure that they are implementing
and complying with the new regulations. To help
states and tribes, EPA has increased funding for
grants to states and tribes to run their drinking water
programs by approximately 60% since FY 1993
EPA is investing substantially in areas to
provide technical assistance and training to the
states on the small systems variances and
exemptions. EPA is also investing in consumer
confidence report rules promulgated in 1998 as well
as the health-based, microbial regulations that will
be promulgated early in 1999. Without adequate
state staff and resources to work with community
water systems, there is a risk that the overall
objective of protection of public health and its
specific annual performance goals for the drinking
water and ground water program will not be met.
The CWAP provides a blueprint for a
cooperative approach to restoring and protecting
water quality in which Federal, state, tribal, and
local governments work collaborativery to focus
resources and implement effective strategies.
A key element of the CWAP is the integration
of public health goals with aquatic ecosystem goals
when identifying watershed priorities. To help
facilitate a comprehensive framework, Federal
Fish Consumption Adv&ofies in the United States
NOTE: Slajes that perform routine fah tissue anaSysss (such
t more cases
conJairsjraSon and tasua BUMS advisories Si«a states
wan less rigofoai Jiah sampfesg programs. En many
cinaa> the states wafe ihs most fish advisories support,
tfew best monjtars>g programs for measuring w«rie BO**-
tamiRBtron m fish, and thear water qusSsy » no viosse
11-14
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
agencies involved in water quality initiatives are
asked to direct "program authorities, technical
assistance, data and enforcement resources to help
states, tribes, and local communities design and
implement their drinking water source water
assessment and protection programs within the
unified watershed protection and restoration
efforts..." (Clean Water Action Plan, page 29).
Although EPA expects participating Federal
agencies to sign a Federal Agency Agreement
developed for mis aspect of the CWAP, the Agency
has minimal ability to ensure that these agencies
work aggressively to promote source water
assessment and protection activities. EPA staff will
devote substantial "front-end" time in the
negotiation of this agreement with pertinent Federal
agencies early in 1999 to maximize the expected
benefits in drinking water and ground water
programs in future fiscal years.
Fish and Recreational Waters
The Agency's success in protecting human
health from consumption of contaminated fish or
exposure to contaminated recreational waters could
be compromised by several major constraints,
including lack of regulatory authority, inability to
measure behavior, and lack of adequate state and
local resources.
The Clean Water Act does not require that
states or tribes operate fish advisory or beach
protection programs. The Agency's role is primarily
to support them through guidance, scientific
information, and technical assistance. EPA can not
take regulatory action to assure that states and tribes
conform to guidance; therefore, success depends on
state/tribal/local commitment to achieving these
goals.
One way of determining whether we have
reduced the consumption of contaminated fish and
shellfish is to find out if people eat the fish they
catch from waters where fish advisories have been
issued. In order to determine whether we have
reduced exposure to contaminated recreational
waters, we also need to know if people comply with
beach closure notices when they are issued.
Acquiring statistical information for such
determinations is difficult.
Without comprehensive, consistent monitoring
of all the Nation's waters, we do not know how
many surface waters should be under advisory or
how many beaches should be closed This expensive
and time-consuming task is beyond the resources of
most states.
Watersheds and Wetlands
EPA's efforts to meet our watershed protection
objective are predicated on the continuation and
improvement of relationships with our Federal,
state, tribal, and local partners. Because of the vast
geographic scope of water quality and wetlands
impairments and the large number of partners upon
whose efforts we depend, we must continue to build
strong and lasting relationships with all levels of
government, the private sector, research community,
and interest groups. Success in meeting our
wetlands objectives is particularly dependent on the
continuing and enhanced cooperation with the Army
Corps of Engineers, Fish and Wildlife Service,
National Marine Fisheries Service, and the Natural
Resources Conservation Service.
The Clean Water Action Plan development
process underscored the interrelations of the Federal
government's environmental protection and
stewardship agencies and programs, and the critical
importance of working together to maximize
achievements. Without continued government-wide
coordination and financial commitment to the Plan's
implementation, we may not meet our water quality
objectives. This is particularly true for successful
enhancement of state nonpoint source management
programs. The states will also need to continue
efforts to overcome historical institutional barriers
to achieve full implementation of their coastal
nonpoint pollution control programs as required
11-15
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
under the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization
Amendments (CZARA).
Fundamental to all of the Agency's efforts to
meet this objective is managing water quality
resources on a watershed basis, with full
involvement of all stakeholders including
communities, individuals, business, state and local
governments and tribes. EPA's ability to meet this
objective will depend on the success of regulatory
and non-regulatory programs and nationwide efforts
to provide and use a broad range of policy, planning,
and scientific tools to establish local goals and
assess progress.
In addition, we must continue to improve our
understanding of the environmental baseline and our
ability to track progress against goals, which also
depends on external parties. The Index of
Watershed Indicators provides reasonable and
defensible assessments of water quality, and we will
continue to depend upon and provide support to our
partners and stakeholders in their efforts to improve
measurement tools and capabilities. State 305(b)
assessments also provide an adequate representation
of individual states water quality conditions,
however the agency recognizes that differing
processes and methods among states can result in
varying depictions of the Nation's water quality.
The Agency intends to address this issue in early
1999 by convening a national 305(b) consistency
workgroup.
Point and Nonpoint Sources
States and localities are assumed to be able to
continue to raise sufficient funds for construction of
necessary wastewater treatment and control
facilities. This is especially critical for new
regulated sources like storm water and Combined
Sewer Overflows (CSOs). In addition they must be
able to maintain sufficient programmatic funds to
continue to effectively manage point source
programs.
It is assumed that states will effectively
strengthen and implement improved nonpoint source
programs consistent with their commitments in this
area. Federal agencies must work together and
fulfill their mutual commitments under their
Strategic Plans and the Clean Water Action Plan
(CWAP) if we are to succeed in addressing nonpoint
source (NPS) needs. No one Agency can succeed in
NPS management without the partnership efforts of
a wide range of Federal, state, local and private
sector interests.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
The Safe Drinking Water Information System
(SDWIS) is the primary data source for
verifying and validating the performance
measures related to the objective of enhancing
public health through safe drinking water in the
Agency's Annual Plan. There are two components
to SDWIS. SDWIS/FED is a national data base
(housed on a mainframe computer) that includes the
core information needed by EPA to assure that
public water systems are in compliance with all of
the statutory requirements in SDWA. This core
information includes: inventory data on over
170,000 public water systems ' nationwide,
violations of health-based standards and monitoring
requirements by these systems, enforcement actions
taken against systems by the state or EPA, and
sampling results for both regulated and unregulated
contaminants in these public water systems.
1 Public Water Systems (PWSs) provide piped water for human
consumption to at least 15 service connections (such as households,
businesses or schools), or serve an average of at least 25 people at
least 60 days per year. PWSs can be community (water is provided
to the same population year round), non-transient non-community
(serves at least 25 of the same people at least six months of the year,
e.g., schools, factories, hospitals) and transient (caters to transitory
customers in non-residences such as campgrounds, motels and gas
stations).
n-i6
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
SDWIS/ STATE is a PC-based system at the state
level that has been designed to address the specific
drinking water information needs of the state. It
includes not only the data that the state must report
to SDWIS/FED but also data the state determines to
be critical to cany out its primary enforcement
authority.
Formal quality assurance/quality control
(QA/QC) procedures have been implemented for
both data entry and data retrieval. The Agency has
a laboratory certification program to ensure that
there is a consistent approach and method for
collecting and analyzing public water supplies'
samples for regulated/ unregulated contaminants. In
addition, the Agency conducts itself or supports
sanitary survey studies of public water utilities,
performs data verification (audits) and management
reviews, and provides extensive technical assistance
and training on QA/QC measures. The SDWIS
Executive Board reviews QA/QC approaches
regularly and a peer review process is in place to test
any new modules or revisions to existing modules of
SDWIS. In addition to completing the design and
development of SDWIS/FED modules, significant
management attention and staff resources will be
focused on expanding ways to strengthen QA/QC.
The Agency has already initiated action in this area
through its ongoing stakeholder process as data
collection, verification, quality and control are very
important aspects for measuring how well EPA is
achieving its annual as well as longer-term strategic
objectives.
Currently, progress in establishing local source
water protection measures is tracked by State
program managers, and reported every other year to
EPA through a Congressionally-mandated report on
State Wellhead Protection Programs. EPA will be
working with States in 1999 to gain agreement to
use this approach to track progress by water systems
utilizing surface waters as well as those systems that
are ground water based. EPA will also be gaining
agreement to report such information as a condition
in their State Revolving Fund (SRF) work plans
which would then make such data collection subject
to audit.
Over the longer term, EPA is working to have
progress in community source water protection
measured at the individual system level through
inclusion into the SDWIS reporting requirements
and such reporting would then be subject to that
system's QA/QC regimen.
Performance data related to NPDES permits
will be tracked largely through the Agency's Permit
Compliance Systems data base which is managed by
the Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA). Data entered into this system
by the Regions and states is subjected to data entry
quality assurance (QA) procedures to verify that the
information is consistent with facility-provided
information. Quality assurance of facility-reported
information is provided programs such as facility
inspections. The system includes additional QA
features related to discharge data, including software
capable of rejecting gross data input errors, and
Quality Management Plans with data criteria.
Performance data on CWSRF management will be
compiled by EPA's Regional offices through
interaction with the states.
The data source for the total population
receiving the benefits of secondary wastewater
treatment is the Clean Water Needs Survey
Database. States enter data into this database
following a strict EPA protocol. Before the
information is accepted into the database, EPA
reviews and approves the data following a strict
review protocol. When data problems are detected,
follow-up with the states occurs to resolve the
problems.
The Agency's progress toward the goal of clean
and safe water can be measured in part by the extent
to which point source and nonpoint source (NFS)
pollutants are discharged into the Nation's waters.
H-17
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Since states are the primary implementers of NFS
programs and policies, the extent to which states
have upgraded their nonpoint source programs to
reflect recent guidance will serve as an available
surrogate for measuring progress toward our NFS
reduction targets. State program upgrades will be
measured by evaluating each state's explicit short
and long-term goals and objectives and their
associated indicators that demonstrate progress.
EPA will conduct reviews and evaluations of the
nonpoint source documents submitted by state
agencies describing the nine key elements required
to upgrade their nonpoint source management
programs. In addition, the Agency will increase
emphasis on monitoring and assessment of nonpoint
source impacts in order to ensure achievement of
long-term goals and objectives.
The performance measure addressing people
benefiting from secondary wastewater treatment or
better has two data sources: the Clean Water Needs
Survey database (CWNS) and the Permits
Compliance Systems (PCS). The CWNS provides
the population information and PCS provides
information on new facilities that are providing
secondary treatment or greater.
States enter data into the CWNS database
following a strict EPA protocol. Before the
information is accepted into the data base, EPA
reviews and approves the data following a strict
review protocol. When data problems are detected,
follow-up with the states occurs to resolve the
problems.
Data entered into the Permit Compliance
System by the Regions and states is subjected to
data entry quality assurance (QA) procedures to
verify that the information is consistent with
facility-provided information. Quality assurance of
facility-provided information is provided by OECA
through programs such as facility inspections. The
system includes additional QA features related to
discharge data, including software capable of
rejecting gross data input errors, and Quality
Management Plans with data criteria.
Research
EPA has several strategies to validate and
verify performance measures in the area of
environmental science and technology research.
Most performance measures are verifiable through
quantitative means. For those measures mat are
output-oriented, actual outputs or products can be
objectively verified. Because the major output of
research is technical information, primarily in the
form of reports, software, protocols, etc., key to the
validation and verification strategies is the
performance of both peer and quality assurance
reviews.
Peer reviews provide assurance during the pre-
planning, planning, and reporting of environmental
science and research activities that the work meets
peer expectations. Only those science activities and
resulting information products that pass Agency
peer review are addressed and published. This
applies to program-level, project-level, and research
outputs.
The quality of the peer review activity is
monitored by EPA to ensure that peer reviews are
performed consistently, according to Agency policy,
and that any identified areas of concern are resolved
through discussion or the implementation of
corrective action.
A quality assurance system is implemented at
all levels in the EPA research organization. The
Agency-wide quality assurance system is a
management system that provides me necessary
elements to plan, implement, document, and assess
the effectiveness of quality assurance and quality
control activities applied to environmental programs
conducted by or for EPA.
H-18
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
This quality management system provides for required from environmental programs, and
identification of environmental programs for which provision of sufficient resources to assure that an
Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) is adequate level of QA/QC is performed.
needed, specification of the quality of the data
H-19
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Goal: Safe Food
The foods Americans eat will be free from unsafe pesticide residues. Children, because they are among the
most vulnerable groups in our society, will especially be protected from the health threats posed by pesticide
residues.
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
'T'he U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
J_ (EPA) plays a major role in the lives of all
Americans by ensuring the safety of the food
supply. EPA accomplishes this by working to
protect human health and the environment from
risks associated with agricultural pesticide use,
while ensuring that exposure from any individual
agricultural pesticide use will not, with reasonable
certainty, cause harm.
EPA regulates pesticides under two main
statutes: the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and Federal Food and
Drug Control Act (FFDCA). FIFRA requires that
pesticides be registered (licensed) by EPA before
they may be sold or distributed in the United States,
and that they perform their intended functions
without causing unreasonable adverse effects on
people or the environment when used according to
EPA-approved label directions.
FFDCA authorizes EPA to set tolerances, or
maximum legal limits, for pesticide residues in food.
Tolerance requirements apply equally to
domestically-produced and imported food. Any
food with residues not covered by a tolerance, or in
amounts mat exceed an established tolerance, may
not be legally marketed in the United States.
Both FIFRA and FFDCA have been amended
by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of
1996, which enhances protection of children and
other sensitive sub-populations. Because of EPA's
work under these laws, Americans enjoy one of the
safest, most abundant, and most affordable food
supplies in the world.
Pesticides subject to EPA regulation include
insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, rodenticides,
disinfectants, plant growth regulators and other
substances intended to control pests. The
regulations directly affect pesticide producers,
formulators, distributors, retailers, commercial pest
control firms, farms, farm workers, industrial and
governmental users, and all households.
Pesticides are used in agriculture, greenhouses,
on lawns, in swimming pools, industrial buildings,
households, and in hospitals and food service
establishments. Total U.S. pesticide usage in 1995
was about 4.5 billion pounds, and there are about
1.3 million certified pesticide applicators in the U.S.
Herbicides are the most widely used pesticides, and
account for the greatest expenditure and volume.
Biopesticides and other non-conventional, or safer,
pesticides make up about 20 percent of the total.
Agriculture accounts for over 70 percent of all
applications.
Through its food safety programs, EPA
enhances health and environmental protection in a
number of ways, including the following:
m-i
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Establishing a single, health-based standard for
all pesticide residues in food, eliminating past
inconsistencies in the law which treated residues
in some processed foods differently from
residues in raw and other processed foods.
Providing for a more complete assessment of
potential risks, with special protections for
potentially sensitive groups, such as infants and
children.
Ensuring that pesticides are periodically
reassessed for consistency with current safely
standards and the latest scientific and
technological advances.
Expanding consumers' "right to know" about
pesticide risks and benefits.
Expediting the approval of safer, reduced risk
pesticides.
Consumers are at risk for potential adverse
effects from pesticide residues ingested either
directly or through processed foods. Pesticides also
"bioaccumulate" throughout the food chain. A
critical step in protecting the public health is to
evaluate food use pesticides for potential toxic
effects such as birth defects, seizures, cancer,
disruption of the endocrine system, changes in
fertility, harmful effects to the kidneys or liver, or
short term effects such as headaches or
disorientation. Ensuring that any residues on food
are at safe levels is the essence of the Safe Food
goal.
MEANS AND STRATEGY
'T'he Agency has a dual strategy to: 1) encourage
A the introduction of new, safer pesticide
ingredients (including new biological agents) within
the context of new pest-management practices;
while 2) systematically reducing the use of the
currently registered pesticides with the highest
potential to cause adverse health effects. FEFRA
mandates Special Review, re-registration reviews
and other risk-management measures available in
the registration authority. FQPA mandates
additional screening for aggregate exposure,
common mechanisms of toxicity and an additional
ten-fold safety factor to ensure protection of
children and infants.
In 1999, the Agency will continue to register
new pesticides that prevent or reduce risk compared
to those currently on the market. Progressively
replacing older, higher-risk pesticides is one of the
most effective methods for curtailing unwanted
health and ecosystem impacts while preserving food
production rates.
Another priority in 1999 will be testing and
screening of existing pesticides to establish new
tolerance levels, where appropriate, and to evaluate
their potential for disrupting endocrine systems in
animals or in humans. The emphasis will be on
balancing the need for pesticides, allowing for
smooth transitions to alternatives, with the risks of
use and exposure.
EPA uses its FEFRA registration authorities and
the FFDCA mechanism (to establish legally
permissible food-borne exposure levels, or
tolerances), in tandem to systematically manage the
risks posed by such exposures. Using the
comprehensive review of existing pesticide use
(according to the benchmark of contemporary
risk-assessment practices) entailed in re-registration,
together with the FQPA requirement to
comprehensively reassess and update existing
tolerances on a six-year schedule, EPA manages the
legal use of pesticides, up to and including the
elimination of pesticides mat present a danger to
human health and the environment.
III-2
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
An additional dimension is the pursuit and
incorporation of the latest scientific advances in
health-risk assessment practices, ensuring current
uses meet the test of a reasonable certainty of no
harm, as stipulated by FQPA. This includes the
incorporation of new scientific data relating to the
effects of endocrine disruption.
Finally, in addition to setting the requirements
of continued legal use of agricultural pesticides is
the broader effort of preventing the misuse of
agricultural pesticides, which EPA shares in
partnership with USDA, FDA and the states.
Research
FQPA identifies the need for science to evaluate
all potential routes and pathways of exposures to
pesticides and their effects on human health.
Research will center on such initiatives as assessing
the risk of exposures of varying frequency and
duration. Research will also compare the effects of
exposure to a mixture of pesticides and other toxic
chemicals with exposure to the individual chemicals.
More information about EPA's food safety
efforts is available on the Office of Pesticides
Program's website at
http://www.epa.gov/pesticides.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
Federal Fungicide, Insecticide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996
New Pesticide Registrations
13
4
14
17
23
17
<?
9
15
10
18
17
16
15
Regular
Safer
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
Regular: Conventional Chemicals and Antimicrobials
Safer: Bio-pesticides and Reduced Risk Chemicals
IH-3
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Resource Summary
(Dollars in thousands)
Safe Food
Reduce Agricultural Pesticides Risk
EPM
S&T
Reduce Use on Food of Pesticides Not Meeting Standards
EPM
S&T
Total Workyears:
FY1999
Pres. Budget
$65,205.9
$26,477.5
$23,479.3
$2,998.2
$38,728.4
$37,276.6
$1,451.8
692.0
FY1999
Enacted
$67,546.4
$29,139.0
$26,243.8
$2,8952
$38,407.4
$30,587.9
$7,819.5
702.4
Strategic Objective: Reduce Agricultural Pesticides Risk
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Pesticide Registration
Pesticide Re-registration
Endocrine Disrupter Screening Program
Pesticide Residue Tolerance Reassessments
$16,166
$4,170
$1,164
$977
$17,492
$4,253
$1,164
$976
m-4
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
PESTICIDE RISK
By 1999: Decrease adverse risk from agricultural pesticides from 1995 levels and assure new pesticides that
enter the market are safe for humans and the environment.
Performance Measures: Target:
Register safer chemicals and biopesticides 15 Registrations
New Chemicals 9 Registrations
Amendments 2000 Actions
Me-toos 600 Actions
New Uses 90 Actions
rnerts 45 Actions
Special Registrations 370 Actions
Tolerance Petitions 95 Actions
Baseline: Risk levels for pesticides registered 1995 or before; targets are annual and as such, have no baseline.
Strategic Objective: Reduce Use on Food of Pesticides
Not Meeting Standards
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Pesticide Re-registration
Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program
Pesticide Residue Tolerance Reassessments
$25,274
$1,418
$8,561
$20,718
$1,418
$8,564
HI-5
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
PESTICIDE TOLERANCES
By 1999: Under pesticide re-registration, EPA will reassess 19% of the existing 9,700 tolerances (cumulative
33%) for pesticide food uses to meet the new statutory standard of "reasonable certainty of no harm."
Performance Measures:
Tolerance Reassessment
REDs
Product Re-registration
Baseline: 9,700 tolerances developed prior to 1996
Target:
1850 Actions
34 Decisions
750 Actions
EXTERNAL FACTORS
'T'he ability of the Agency to achieve its strategic
JL goals and objectives depends on several factors
over which the Agency has only partial control
or little influence. EPA relies heavily on
partnerships with states, tribes, local governments
and regulated parties to protect the environment and
human health.
hi addition, EPA assures the safe use of
pesticides in coordination with the USDA and FDA,
who have responsibility to monitor and control
residues and other environmental exposures. EPA
also works with these agencies to coordinate with
other countries and international organizations with
which the United States shares environmental goals.
Much of the success of EPA programs also
depends on the voluntary cooperation of the private
sector and the public.
EPA's ability to achieve the goals and
objectives is also predicated on an adequate level of
resources for direct program implementation by
EPA as well as for delegated programs. Other
factors that could delay or prevent the Agency's
achievement of some objectives include: lawsuits
that delay or stop EPA's and/or State partners'
planned activities; new or amended legislation; and
new commitments within the Administration.
Economic growth and changes in producer and
consumer behavior, such as shifts in energy prices
or automobile use, could have an influence on the
Agency's ability to achieve several of the objectives
within the time frame specified.
New environmental technology, unanticipated
complexity or magnitude of environmental
problems, or newly identified environmental
problems and priorities could affect the time frame
for achieving many of the goals and objectives. In
particular, pesticide use is affected by unanticipated
outbreaks of pest infestations and/or disease factors,
which requires EPA to review emergency uses to
ensure no unreasonable risks to the environment will
result EPA has no control over requests for various
registration actions (new products, amendments,
III-6
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
uses, etc.), so its projection of regulatory workload
is subject to change.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
The performance measures for this goal include
program outputs for the Registration program
and are used as an indirect measure of reducing risk
New pesticides and tolerance settings undergoing
registration under the FQPA standard are deemed to
be less risky than those which were registered before
FQPA, because the new registrations have to meet
a more stringent health standard. Additionally, the
registration of reduced risk pesticides could
potentially reduce the use of the higher risk
pesticides, and in doing so, reduce risk. Specific
outputs include the numbers of new registered
pesticides, new uses of existing pesticides, inert
ingredients, "me-toos" or pesticides produced by
more than one manufacturer, special registrations
and newly registered safer chemicals and
biopesticides.
The performance measures are tracked
internally by the Office of Pesticides (OPP) and the
information is readily available to the public. The
database used to track Registration outputs is the
Pesticides Regulatory Action Tracking System
(PRATS), which we update as an action is
completed. The Chemical Review Management
System (CRMS) tracks study requirements for
company submission information. PRATS and
CRMS thus provide internal means for ensuring that
goals are being met. Additional information on
pesticide usage is available from the National
Pesticide Residue Database (NPRD).
Other performance measures for this goal
include outputs for the Re-registration program and
are direct measures of reducing the use of pesticides
which do not meet the FQPA standard. The
performance measures are tracked internally by the
Office of Pesticides (OPP). The Pesticide
Regulatory Action Tracking System (PRATS)
which tracks registration actions, also tracks product
re-registration actions. Outputs include the number
of tolerance reassessments, re-registration eligibility
decisions (REDS) which are a portion of the re-
registration process, and the final product re-
registrations completed in a given year.
Research
EPA has several strategies to validate and
verify performance measures in the area of
environmental science and technology research.
Most performance measures are verifiable through
quantitative means. For those measures that are
output-oriented, actual outputs or products can be
objectively verified. Because the major output of
research is technical information, primarily in the
form of reports, software, protocols, etc., key to the
validation and verification strategies is the
performance of both peer and quality assurance
reviews.
Peer reviews provide assurance during the
pre-planning, planning, and reporting of
environmental science and research activities that
the work meets peer expectations. Only those
science activities and resulting information products
that pass Agency peer review are addressed and
published. This applies to program-level,
project-level, and research outputs. The quality of
the peer review activity is monitored by EPA to
ensure that peer reviews are performed consistently,
according to Agency policy, and that any identified
areas of concern are resolved through discussion or
the implementation of corrective action.
IH-7
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
A quality assurance system is implemented at
all levels in the EPA research organization. The
Agency-wide quality assurance system is a
management system that provides the necessary
elements to plan, implement, document, and assess
the effectiveness of quality assurance and quality
control activities applied to environmental programs
conducted by or for EPA. This quality management
system provides for identification of environmental
programs for which Quality Assurance/Quality
Control (QA/QC) is needed, specification of the
quality of the data required from environmental
programs, and provision of sufficient resources to
assure that an adequate level of QA/QC is
performed.
m-8
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Goal: Preventing Pollution and Reducing Risk
in Communities, Homes, Workplaces and Ecosystems
Pollution prevention and risk management strategies aimed at cost-effectively eliminating, reducing, or
minimising emissions and contamination will result in cleaner and safer environments in which all Americans
can reside, work, and enjoy life. EPA will safeguard ecosystems and promote the health of natural communities
that are integral to the quality of life in this nation.
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
'""""'he diversity and fragility of America's
J_ environments (communities, homes, workplaces
and ecosystems) requires EPA to adopt a multi-
faceted approach to protecting all Americans from
the threats posed by pesticide and toxic chemicals.
The underlying principle of the activities
incorporated under this goal is the application of
pollution prevention. Preventing pollution before it
does damage is cheaper and smarter than costly
cleanup and remediation, as evidenced with
Superfund and PCB cleanups, hi 199S, facilities
reported a total of 10.2 billion pounds of pollutants
released, treated or combusted for energy. Reducing
waste, and reducing the toxic chemicals that are
used in industrial processing, protects the
environment and also lowers costs for industry.
Pollution prevention involves changing the behavior
of those that cause the pollution and fostering the
MEANS AND STRATEGY
THhe Agency mixes both regulatory and voluntary
_L methods to accomplish its job. For example,
each year the New Chemicals program reviews and
manages the risks of over 2,000 new chemicals and
40 products of biotechnology that enter the
marketplace. This new chemical review process not
only protects the public from the immediate threats
of harmful chemicals, like PCBs, from entering the
marketplace but it has also contributed to changing
the behavior of the chemical industry, making
industry more aware and responsible for the impact
wider use of preventive practices as a means to
achieve cost effective, sustainable results.
In Goal 4 the Agency targets certain specific
chemicals of especially high risk as well as the full
range of pollutants addressed by the pollution
prevention program. Many chemicals are
particularly toxic to children. Lead, for instance,
damages the brain and nervous system and can
result in behavioral and learning problems if blood
levels are too high. Despite great progress over the
last twenty years, there are still over 1 million
American children with elevated blood levels of
lead. Asbestos, PCB's and other chemicals present
in our buildings and in the environment pose risks to
anyone exposed as well as to wildlife. For other
common chemicals, we simply don't know what, if
any, risks are present.
these chemicals have on human health and the
environment.
This awareness has lead industry to produce
safer "greener" alternative chemicals and pesticides.
Fewer harmful chemicals are entering the
marketplace and our environment today because of
the New Chemical Program. Through our Design
for the Environment program, EPA forms
partnerships with industry to find sensible solutions
to prevent pollution.
IV-1
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Much remains to be done to safeguard our
Nation's communities, homes, workplaces and
ecosystems. Preventing pollution through
regulatory, voluntary, and partnership actions -
educating and changing the behavior of our citizens
- is a sensible and effective approach to sustainable
development while protecting our Nation's health.
Preventing pollution through partnerships is
central to the Agency's Chemical Right-to-Know
initiative in 1999. This new initiative will provide
the public with information on the basic health and
environmental effects of the 3000 chemicals
produced at the highest volumes in the U.S. Most
Americans come into daily contact with many of
these chemicals, yet relatively little is known about
their potential impacts. Basic hazard testing
information will be the focus of a high visibility,
voluntary challenge program recognizing industry's
contribution to the public knowledge base on these
prevalent chemicals. Risks to children are a
particular focus, and the Agency will supplement the
information from industry with additional testing to
identify and address any chemicals of special
concern for children's health.
Also central to the Agency's work under this
goal in 1999 will be increased attention on
documenting and taking action to reduce risk from
chemicals that persist, bioaccumulate and are highly
toxic (PBT's) and from chemicals that have
endocrine disruption effects. These chemicals have
very high potentials for causing long-term damage
to humans and to ecosystems. Accumulating in the
food chain, often far from the source of initial
exposure, and disrupting the life cycle and creation
of healthy offspring, in essence these chemicals
produce a multiplier effect that is difficult to halt
once it is in action in the environment. Pollution
prevention and controlling releases are the
mainstays of protection, once these chemicals are
correctly identified.
Under this Goal, EPA ensures that pesticide use
not only results in safe food, but also causes no
unnecessary exposure either to human health or to
natural ecosystems. In addition to the array of
risk-management measures entailed in the
registration authorities under FIFRA for individual
pesticide ingredients, EPA has specific programs to
foster worker and pesticide-user safety as well as
ground-water protection, and the Agency fosters the
safe, effective use of anti-microbial agents. EPA
works to ensure the comprehensive protection of
non-target organisms and endangered species in
particular, and to reduce the contribution of
pesticides to specific ecological threats such as
endocrine disruption or pollutant loading in
geographic areas.
EPA also pursues a variety of field activities at
the regional, state and local levels, including the
promotion of pesticide environmental stewardship
programs with user groups as partners. Finally,
EPA promotes the use of sensible Integrated Pest
Management (TPM) and the prevention of misuse in
both the urban and rural environments.
In several cases achieving the strategic
objectives under this goal is a shared responsibility
with other federal agencies. For example EPA's role
in reducing the levels of environmental lead
exposure involves promotion of federal-state
partnerships to lower specific sources of
environmental lead, such as lead-based paint and
other lead-content products.
These partnerships emphasize public education
and empowerment strategies, which fit into
companion federal efforts (e.g., HHS and the
IV-2
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Centers for Disease Control; HUD) to monitor
and reduce environmental lead levels. Likewise, the
results of EPA's efforts to reduce indoor air
exposures are measured by public-health agencies.
EPA focuses on specific agents (e.g., radon), on
general categories of indoor facilities (schools,
homes and workplaces), and on the characteristic
risks presented in each category.
with tribes, and is cognizant of the Nation's interest
in conserving the cultural uses of natural resources.
Research
The human health and ecosystems research
included in this objective is designed to provide
direct support to EPA's regulatory program for
pesticides and toxic substances. The information
Radon is estimated to cause about 14,000 deaths per year. However, this number could range from 7,000 to 30,000
deaths per year. The numbers of deaths from other causes are taken from 1990 National Safety Council reports.
Intrinsic to the effort to prevent pollution is the
minimization of the quantities of waste generated by
industry, municipalities and hazardous-waste
management operations. Strategies range from
fostering recycling and other resource-recovery
processes to broad-based campaigns to re-engineer
the consumption and use of raw materials or
personal conservation of resources.
This Goal focuses on how Americans live in
communities and features the particular commitment
of promoting environmental protection in Indian
country, as consistent with our trust relationship
developed from application of human health
research will significantly increase understanding of
the impacts of specific pesticides and toxic
substances on human health.
Ecosystems research will help EPA develop the
evaluative effects methods that are used in the
regulation of toxic substances, including pesticides,
in ecosystems. Test methods developed through this
research program are incorporated in the existing
compendium of test methods used to support
Agency regulatory requirements.
IV-3
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
In addition, research under this goal will
characterize indoor air factors that contribute to the
onset and exacerbation of asthma. More
information on EPA's research programs can be
found on http://www.epa.gov/.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
Clean Air Act (CAA) section 309 (42 U.S.C. 7609)
Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251-1387)]
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (42
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) (42 U.S.C. 11001-11050)
Federal Food, Drag and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
Federal Fungicide, Insecticide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
Indian General Assistance Program (GAP) Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 4368b)
Pollution Prevention Act (PPA)
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (42 U.S.C. 6901-6992k)
Safe Drinking Water Act sections 1412 and 1417 (42 U.S.C. 300g-l, 300g-6)
Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984.
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) Title IV, "Radon Gas and Indoor
Air Quality Research Act"
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
IV-4
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Resource Summary
(Dollars in thousands)
Preventing Pollution and Reducing Risk in Communities, Homes,
Workplaces and Ecosystems
Reduce Public and Ecosystem Exposure to Pesticides
EPM
S&T
STAG
Reduce Lead Poisoning
EPM
STAG
Safe Handling and Use of Commercial Chemicals and
Microorganisms
EPM
S&T
Healthier Indoor
Air
EPM
S&T
STAG
Improve Pollution Prevention Strategies, Tools, Approaches
EPM
STAG
Decrease Quantity and Toxicity of Waste
EPM
STAG
Assess Conditions in Indian Country
EPM
STAG
Total Workyears:
FY1999
Pres. Budget
$259,721.3
$48,998.9
$35,020.7
$863.6
$13,114.6
$30,844.6
$17,132.4
$13,712.2
$44,750.6
$32,007.1
$12,743.5
$34,017.6
$20,874.7
$4,984.9
$8,158.0
$26,829.8
$20,830.3
$5,999.5
$23,429.1
$22350.3
$1,078.8
$50,850.7
$8265.3
$42,585.4
1,122.8
FY1999
Enacted
$237,789.8
$43,178.2
$29219.0
$844.6
$13,114.6
$30,817.4
$17,1052
$13,7122
$42,443.2
$31206.6
$11236.6
$29,629.4
$16,662.1
$4,809.3
$8,158.0
$21,884.0
$15,884.5
$5,999.5
$18,852.5
$15,779.5
$3,073.0
$50,985.1
$8^99.8
$42,585.3
1,124.9
IV-5
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Reduce Public and Ecosystem
Exposure to Pesticides
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Pesticide Registration
Pesticide Re-registration
Endocrine Disrupter Screening Program
Agricultural Worker Protection
Pesticide Applicator Certification and Training
Pesticides Program Implementation Grant
$10,253
$4,860
$268
$4,769
$5,516
$13,115
$7,451
$4,856
$268
$4,365
$5,314
$13,115
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
PESTICIDES AND POLLUTANTS REDUCTION
By 1999: Protect homes, communities, and workplaces from harmful exposures to pesticides and related
pollutants through improved cultural practices and enhanced public education, resulting in a reduction of 15%
cumulative (1994 reporting base) in the incidences of pesticides poisoning reported nationwide.
Performance Measures: Target:
Environmental Stewardship Strategies. 42 complete
Incidences of pesticides poisonings 15% Reduction
(cumulative)
Labor Population will be adequately trained 38% Trained
(cumulative)
Pesticides w/high probability to leach/persist in groundwater 10% managed
Baseline: 1995 reporting for adverse effects data and for number of workers trained. Stewardship figures are
cumulative. Baseline for ground water contamination managed is under development.
IV-6
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Reduce Lead Poisoning
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Lead Risk Reduction Program $16,929 $16,911
Grants to States for Lead Risk Reduction $13,712 $13,712
Animal Performance Goals and Measures
LEAD-BASED PAINT TRAINING
By 1999: Complete the building of a lead-based paint abatement certification and training program in 50
states to ensure significant decreases in children's blood lead levels by 2005 through reduced exposure to lead-
based paint.
Performance Measures: Target:
State programs developed for the training, accreditation and certification of lead-based paint 35 States
abatement professionals.
A Federal training, accreditation and certification Program will be established and 15 Programs
administered in states which choose not to seek approval from EPA to administer.
Baseline: Number of states in which either federal or state program will be established.
IV-7
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Safe Handling and Use of Commercial
Chemicals and Microorganisms
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Endocrine Disrupter Screening Program
New Chemical Review
Existing Chemical Data, Screening, Testing and Management
National Program chemicals: PCBs, Asbestos, Fibers, and Dioxin
$1,600
$14,140
$12,491
$3,301
$1,257
$13,410
$12,870
$3,012
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
CHEMICAL AND MICROORGANISM SAFETY
By 1999: Ensure that of the approximately 1,800 new chemicals and microorganisms submitted by industry
each year, those that are introduced in commerce are safe to humans and the environment for their intended
uses.
Performance Measures: Target:
TSCA Pre-Manufacture Notice Reviews. 1,800 Notices
Baseline: Expected number of chemicals to be submitted in 1999.
IV-8
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency J 999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Healthier Indoor Air
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
State Radon Grants $8,158 $8,158
Indoor Environments: ETS $1,183 $1,050
Indoor Environments: Schools $6,789 $2,921
Indoor Environments: Asthma $2,589 $1,136
EMPACT $905 $0
Research: Indoor Air Research $3,012 $2,836
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
HEALTHIER RESIDENTIAL INDOOR ENVIRONMENTS
By 1999: 700,000 additional people will live in healthier residential indoor environments.
Performance Measures: Target:
People Living in Healthier Indoor Air 700,000 People
Baseline: 1. The baseline for people living in homes built with radon resistant features is 600,000 in 1994. 2.
The baseline for the number of children exposed to ETS is 19,500,000 in 1994. 3. The baseline for the
number of people living in radon mitigated homes is 780,000 in 1994.
IV-9
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Improve Pollution Prevention Strategies,
Tools, Approaches
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Design for the Environment $4,844 $4,554
Pollution Prevention Program $9,676 $8,872
Pollution Prevention Incentive Grants to States $6,000 $6,000
Common Sense Initiative $1,179 $429
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
TRI POLLUTANTS REDUCTION
By 1999: The quantity of Toxic Release Inventory pollutants released, treated or combusted for energy
recovery will be reduced by 200 million pounds, or two percent, from 1998 reporting levels.
Performance Measures: Target:
Reduction of TRI pollutants released 200 million
pounds
Baseline: Previous end level for reduction reported in most recent TRI data (1997).
IV-10
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Decrease Quantity and Toxicity of
Waste
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
RCRA State Grants
Waste Minimization
Source Reduction
Recycling
Urban Environmental Quality and Human Health
Common Sense Initiative
$1,079
$2,399
$5,505
$5,489
$220
$1,782
$3,073
$2,195
$2,729
$4,981
$0
$634
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
By 1999: Maintain levels (for a cumulative total of 28% or 62 million tons) of municipal solid waste (MSW)
diverted from land filling and combustion, and maintain per capita generation of RCRA municipal solid waste
at 4.3 pounds per day.
Performance Measures: Target:
Millions of tons of municipal solid waste diverted. 62 million tons
Daily per capita generation of municipal solid waste. 4.3 Ibs. MSW
Baseline: 1990 levels established at 17% of MSW diverted and 4.3 pounds MSW per capita daily generation.
IV-11
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Assess Conditions in Indian Country
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Tribal General Assistance Grants $42,585 $42,585
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
TRIBAL AGREEMENTS
By 1999: 10% of Tribal environmental baseline information will be collected and 10 additional tribes
(cumulative total of 45) will have tribal/EPA environmental agreements or identified environmental priorities.
Performance Measures: Target:
Tribal environmental baseline information collected 10% Baseline
Tribes with Tribal/EPA environmental agreements or identified environmental priorities. 10 Tribes
Baseline: EPA completed the design of a system to collect and manage data on environmental conditions in
Indian country at the end FY 1998. The data assessment process will be initiated in FY 1999. In 1998, a total
of 35 tribes had EPA/Tribal Environmental Agreements or similar plans.
IV-12
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
EXTERNAL FACTORS
r I %e ability of the Agency to achieve its strategic
1- goals and objectives depends on several factors
over which the Agency has only partial control or
little influence. EPA relies heavily on partnerships
with states, tribes, local governments and regulated
parties to protect the environment and human health.
In addition, EPA assures the safe use of pesticides
in coordination with the USDA and FDA, who have
responsibility to monitor and control residues and
other environmental exposures. EPA also works
with these agencies to coordinate with other
countries and international organizations with which
the United States shares environmental goals. This
plan discusses the mechanisms and programs that
the Agency employs to assure that our partners in
environmental protection will have the capacity to
conduct the activities needed to achieve the
objectives. However, as noted, EPA often has
limited control over these entities. ID addition, much
of the success of EPA programs depends on the
voluntary cooperation of the private sector and the
general public.
EPA's ability to achieve the goals and
objectives is also predicated on an adequate level of
resources for direct program implementation by
EPA as well as for delegated programs. The
objectives in this plan are based on current funding
levels. If appropriations are lower or different from
requested, some objectives may be difficult or
impossible to achieve. Other factors that could
delay or prevent the Agency's achievement of some
objectives include: lawsuits that delay or stop EPA's
and/or State partners' planned activities; new or
amended legislation; and new commitments within
the Administration. Economic growth and changes
in producer and consumer behavior, such as shifts in
energy prices or automobile use, could have an
influence on the Agency's ability to achieve several
of the objectives within the timeframe specified.
Large-scale accidental releases (such as large
oil spills) or rare catastrophic natural events (such
as volcanic eruptions) could, in the short term,
impact EPA's ability to achieve the objectives, hi
the longer term, new environmental technology,
unanticipated complexity or magnitude of
environmental problems, or newly identified
environmental problems and priorities could affect
the timeframe for achieving many of the goals and
objectives, hi particular, pesticide use is affected
by unanticipated outbreaks of pest infestations
and/or disease factors, which require EPA to review
emergency uses to ensure no unreasonable risks to
the environment will result. EPA has no control
over requests for various registration actions (new
products, amendments, uses, etc.), so its projection
of regulatory workload is subject to change.
Success in improving indoor air quality depends
upon the work of many federal and state agencies,
and ultimately on the Agency's ability to provide
useful information to individuals so that they may
intelligently identify and avert risks to health in the
household, workplace, schools and other indoor
settings.
In the absence of regulatory authority and
grants to states for indoor environment programs,
the voluntary Federal indoor environments program
relies heavily on state and local, private, and non-
profit partnerships to implement and manage indoor
environmental risk reduction activities/programs.
Many of our partners and states have small
programs that often make it difficult to achieve the
desired level of results.
The Agency's ability to achieve its objective of
decreasing the quantity and toxicity of waste could
be impacted by the increased flexibility provided to
states to redirect resources under the National
Environmental Performance Partnership System
IV-13
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
(NEPPS). If states redirect resources away from
this area, it would impact both annual performance
and progress in implementing the Agency's strategic
plan. To mitigate this potential issue, EPA is
working with the Environmental Council of States
(ECOS) to develop core measures beyond FY 1998
and coordinating with states to develop, for
example, the RCRA Persistent, Bioaccumulative,
and Toxics (PBT) list and other tools mat will focus
state activities on shared EPA and state goals.
In addition, recycling rates are affected by shifts
in prices and potential regulatory changes to reduce
or eliminate disincentives to safe recycling. While
market forces have helped to achieve current rates,
better markets for recycled
products/recyclables/reusables are needed to
encourage increased recycling rates and source
reduction. EPA has worked with the Chicago Board
of Trade and the Federal Environmental Executive
and has several other ongoing projects that
encourage market development.
Achieving our objective is based upon a
partnership with Indian Tribal governments, many
of which face severe poverty, employment, housing
and education issues. Because Tribal Leader and
environmental director support will be critical in
achieving this objective, the Agency is working with
Tribes to ensure that they understand the importance
of having good information on environmental
conditions in Indian country to meet their and EPA
needs, hi addition, EPA also works with other
Federal Agencies, Department of Interior (U.S.
Geological Survey, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and
Bureau of Reclamation), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, and the Corps of
Engineers to help build programs on tribal lands.
Changing priorities in these agencies could
adversely affect their ability to work with EPA in
establishing strategies and regulations that affect
Indian Tribes.
IV-14
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Reduce Public and Ecosystem Exposure of
Pesticides
11 ^he performance measures for this objective are
JL program outputs for the Field and
Environmental Stewardship programs and are used
as an indirect measure of reducing risk. The number
of workers suffering from adverse effects of
pesticides may be derived from various sources such
as poison control center data, public health system
data, information gathered from the states and
public health agencies. The labor population
training data may be determined using information
from USDA and States. The pesticides considered
to be threats to groundwater have been identified
and will be used as the base.
Reduce Lead Poisoning
The annual performance goals and measures
identified under this objective are expressed as the
completion of explicit tasks. These measures
require assessment by program staff and
management. Verification of these measures does
not involve any pollutant database analysis, but will
require objective assessment of tasks completed,
compliance with regulatory development and
authority delegation schedules, and the satisfaction
of U.S. environmental negotiating objectives.
The accomplishment of EPA's broader lead
poisoning reduction goals (e.g., lead rule
promulgation, certified training programs,
completed technical reports, etc.) will be verified by
realizing a significant reduction of children's blood
lead levels compared to levels in the 1970's. For the
past two decades, the National Center for Health
Statistics (NCHS) has collected data on the general
health of the Nation's population through the
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
(NHNES). The collection and laboratory analysis of
children's blood for lead has been part of this
program since its inception and has become the
standard for the estimation of national blood lead
averages. It is also the only national survey of
children's blood lead levels.
NCHS is preparing to begin another survey.
The results, scheduled for release in 2002, will be
used to measure the success of EPA's lead program.
The verification and validation of data from
NHNES will be conducted by NCHS through a
rigorous quality assurance program to ensure that
the sample selected for examination is truly
representative of the U.S. population and that
laboratory analyses of collected blood samples are
of known accuracy and precision (NCHS has over
20 years experience in conducting this survey and
these analyses.)
In addition, EPA will evaluate the effectiveness
of regulations previously promulgated. Through
mechanisms including focus groups and surveys, the
Agency will measure the awareness and any changes
in behavior of the regulated community as a result
of these regulations.
For example, at the end of 1998, EPA will have
established a training, certification, and
accreditation program for lead-based paint
professionals in states that do not seek approval
from the Agency to administer their own program
(about 15-20 states are not expected to seek
authorization). For more information:
(http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/lead/leadcert.htm). In
1999, following an outreach effort to increase
awareness of state residents on EPA's certification
program, the Agency will measure the success of
this regulation in certifying professionals.
The success will be determined by the degree of
awareness of the program among professionals who
are likely to become certified. Similar evaluations
will be developed for other regulations.
IV-15
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Safe Handling and Use of Commercial
Chemicals and Microorganisms)
Performance will be measured by the number
of new chemicals Pre-Manufacture Notice
submissions (PMN's) that are determined by EPA to
be safe and not to require EPA management
controls. PMN's submissions and determinations
are tracked under formal EPA document
management and decision-making systems to ensure
compliance with statutory deadlines for Agency
action. The "greener" the new chemical EPA
receives for review, the more success achieved in
protecting human health and the environment.
Performance will also be measured by how much
knowledge we gain in understanding the risks of
toxic chemicals to human health and the
environment. EPA will gain this knowledge through
required and voluntary chemical testing by industry.
When EPA identifies specific risks posed by toxic
chemicals, performance will be judged by its success
to mitigate through actions such as labeling or
banning of the chemical or its use in certain
products. These counts will be drawn from formal
regulatory action tracking systems maintained by
EPA that have thorough QA/QC procedures to
ensure the integrity of the data maintained therein.
Last, success will be judged by lowering risk
through preventing pollution and achieving this
through voluntary compliance over regulated
controls.
The Chemical Right-to-Know (CRTK)
initiative and the Endocrine Disrupter screening and
testing project (http://www.epm.gov/endocrine') are
both major efforts EPA is undertaking to ensure
commercial chemicals are adequately tested for
health and environmental effects and that this data
is available to the public. Performance of the CRTK
initiative can easily be measured by tracking the
number of chemicals for which EPA has received
another accountability tool used to verify and
validate performance measures. The recently
developed GPRA structure will be incorporated into
OMIS to ensure consistent maintenance and
commitments to complete screening-level testing
from chemical manufacturers and by tracking the
number of chemicals covered by regulations
requiring chemical testing. Verification of program
performance for the Endocrine Disrupter screening
and testing program can be determined by tracking
the number of chemicals that have been tested by
EPA with the recommended protocols.
EPA has several strategies to validate and
verify performance measures in the area of environ-
mental science and research. The Agency has
implemented a risk-based research planning process
to use risk assessment and risk management as
principle priority-setting criteria. EPA conducts
annual research program reviews to both evaluate
the status and accomplishments of its research, and
to determine planning priorities.
Chief among the Agency's validation and
verification mechanisms is a rigorous peer review
process. In a July 1997 memorandum, EPA's
Deputy Administrator states that peer review will be
expanded "to include both the major work products
provided in the past and ... all scientific and
technical products supporting Agency decisions...".
This expanded and strengthened focus on peer
review will help ensure that the performance
measures listed here are verified and validated by
external organizations. The Agency utilizes peer
review throughout the research planning and
implementation process, both to ensure that planned
research addresses critical knowledge issues within
EPA's mission and to assess the quality of scientific
research plans, products, and proposals. This is
accomplished through the use of independent
entities.
The Office of Research and Development
Management Information System (OMIS) will be
reporting, resulting in greater accuracy and
consistency of information to users.
IV-16
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Healthier Indoor Air
Radon
Progress on the number of homes tested for
radon and the number of homes fixed if levels are
elevated is assessed under a cooperative agreement
between EPA and the Conference of Radiation
Control Program Officials (CRCPD). CRCPD
conducts a biennial telephone survey of randomly
selected households in which the primary decision
maker is asked questions which include their
awareness of radon, whether they have tested their
home for radon, whether they have taken steps to
mitigate elevated levels of radon, whether there are
children aged six and under in the home, and if so,
whether smoking goes on inside the home. The
study is performed by CRCPD for its own uses, and
quality control and assurance procedures are the
responsibility of CRCPD and its survey contractor.
The Agency survey of the radon industry will
determine the amount of residential testing and
mitigation completed by radon service providers
(http://www.epin.gov/iag). This survey will
supplement the residential telephone survey, and
will be conducted by EPA and its contractor.
Quality assurance and control procedures will be
designed in accordance with Agency standards. The
Agency purchases the results of an annual survey of
home builders which assesses the extent to which
residential builders are employing radon-resistant
construction techniques. Quality assurance and
control procedures are the responsibility of the
National Association of Home Builders.
ETS
To ascertain the number of children aged 6 and
under exposed to ETS in their homes, the program
utilizes the biennial survey conducted by the
Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors,
as described above. In addition, the Agency uses the
Department of Health and Human Services National
Health Interview Survey, which poses a similar
question to a national sample of households, as a
check on the accuracy of the CRCPD study results.
Schools
The number of schools that implement the
Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) "Tools for Schools" kit is
tracked through a centralized database where data
are provided by program office staff, the
Government Printing Office, national cooperative
partners, contractor staff, and the EPA regional
offices, (http://www.eDa.gov/iae/schools/index.html).
The accuracy of this database is dependent upon the
reliability of personnel filling out the information
form and their understanding of the steps taken in
their school(s) to implement EPA's multi-step
guidance. Because this is a voluntary program, the
Agency has no authority to verify the accuracy or
comprehensiveness of information provided by
school personnel. In addition, the program accesses
the National Association of Energy Service
Companies database which tracks companies that
have performed ventilation work in schools as well
as public school student enrollment numbers.
Improve Pollution Prevention Strategies,
Tools, Approaches
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data:
Industrial facilities in specified Standard
Identification Codes (SIC) are required to provide
TRI data for chemicals listed by law or regulation.
The data are estimates by the reporting facility of
the quantities of toxic chemicals in production-
related wastes that are released to the environment
(including disposed of, used for energy recovery,
recycled or treated). Facilities also must report
quantities that are released or managed as waste off-
site as a result of remedial actions, catastrophic
events, or one-time events not associated with
production processes, hi 1999, nearly 28,000
facilities are expected to provide TRI data.
The source reduction performance measure (see
Goal # 1, above) relies on data reported by industrial
IV-17
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
facilities (on TRI Form R's) regarding any source
reduction activities undertaken by the facilities
during the reporting year, and the methods used to
identify these activities. Facilities select the
methods they use to estimate the reported quantities,
and the validity of the data depends on proper
selection and application of the estimation methods
as well as on the quality of the available data.
EPA conducts data quality site surveys to
identify aspects of the TRI data reporting process
that could be improved and to provide a quantitative
assessment of the accuracy of data collected
(http ://www. epa. gov/opptintr/tri). The latest
survey, completed in 1998, showed that errors in
reporting source reduction activities varied by
industry sector and resulted primarily from
misinterpretations (by facilities) of key terms,
particularly "source reduction." The survey also
suggested that source reduction activities may be
somewhat under-reported through TRI, since the
results of such activities are not subject to TRI
reporting (hence there is less incentive to disclose
the activities), and for other reasons.
The Agency is preparing additional guidance to
assist facilities in preparing their Form R's. This
guidance will focus on the reporting elements
required by the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990
and should be issued in the year 2000.
hi addition to those facilities reporting under
TRI, EPA will utilize data from a variety of sources.
EPA's PBT program expects to draw upon National
Health and Nutrition Exam Survey (NHANES) data,
Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network
(IADN) monitoring data, a fetal cord monitoring
study, and an EPA Office of Water (OW) fish tissue
study, as these data sources become available.
EPA's Design for Environment Program conducts
an evaluation of the extent to which cleaner
technologies have been adopted by each industry
that takes part in the program. This can be as
simple as collecting data on the amount of a
particular chemical used within an industry (for
example, perchloroethylene used in drycleaning) or
as challenging as surveying an industry's overall
progress in installing newer, less polluting
processes. Survey participants are typically small to
medium-sized firms. While no single central
database depository exists for all survey results,
findings are frequently documented and
incorporated to produce outreach materials for
industry.
Decrease Quantity and Toxicity of Waste
Data for RCRA performance measures under
this objective are tracked through a variety of
systems, ranging from national databases managed
by EPA to voluntary reporting from program
partners to information collected by the Commerce
Department. In all instances appropriate
verification and validation procedures are in place
(http://www.epa. gov/epaoswer/osw/index.htm').
Monitoring national progress in reductions of
PBTs will rely heavily on the Toxics Release
Inventory (TRI) for establishing a baseline for
tracking annual performance and measuring the
reductions of a specific list of PBT chemicals in
hazardous waste. The regulated industry reports the
TRI data, and the Agency receives the reports and
enters the data directly into the TRI. All applicable
validation controls are in place for the TRI system.
Although there are some chemicals on this list
that are not included in TRI reporting in 1991, some
of these chemicals were either required to be
reported in 1995 or will be added to the TRI in an
upcoming rulemaking that expands reporting and
lowers the reporting threshold for certain chemicals.
There still remains a subset of chemicals (very small
in number) that we will not have TRI information
on. For these chemicals, EPA plans on using the
Biennial Reporting Information, the 1986 RCRA
Generator Survey, the National Hazardous Waste
Constituent Survey (1996), and the RCRA Waste
Code Crosswalk to establish a baseline.
IV-18
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Limitations of the TRI include: 1) not all
sectors that generate hazardous wastes report in the
TRI; and, 2) information that is reported is not
directly related to the RCRA program. However
these limitations are not of great concern. Although
all sectors that generate hazardous wastes do not
report in TRI, the majority of waste (as discovered
through analysis of Biennial Report System data) is
generated by those sectors that do report to TRI and
are the most consistent reporters in BRS as well as
TRI. Secondly, although information reported in the
TRI is not directly related to RCRA, EPA is able to
identify those reporters in TRI that are also
generators of hazardous wastes. Both these
limitations are far outweighed by the strengths in
TRI: 1) that data is collected annually and therefore
will provide us with more trend analyses; 2) that
data is collected not on waste streams, but on
chemicals; and 3) that improvements currently are
being made to the systems and the reporting
universe is expanding, including more reporting of
use and release of chemicals of concern for which
we have limited information. An upcoming TRI
rulemaking will expand reporting of some chemicals
and lower the report threshold of others. This will
fill in some of the data limitations identified above.
Tracking the rate of recycling for hazardous
waste will use information in the Biennial Reporting
System (BRS), a national database which supports
EPA's RCRA program. BRS is a biennial
compilation of information supplied by hazardous
waste handlers and provides data on types and
amounts of waste handled, as well as how the waste
is handled (e.g., disposed, recycled). EPA will track
progress on increase of hazardous waste safely
recycled using the BRS. The regulated industry
reports the BRS data, and states and EPA regions
quality check the data and enter it into the data base.
The BRS data system has
validation/verification controls in place to help
ensure that data is complete and accurate. The BRS
data entry software includes a series of basic and
advanced edits which check for completeness and
accuracy. Additionally, while states and EPA
regions submit essentially complete BRS databases,
EPA Headquarters runs BRS data quality
verification reports and then coordinates with states
and EPA regions to discuss potential data errors.
Analysis also is conducted on significant changes
which have occurred since the last biennial report.
Prior to issuing the final BRS report, a second set
of BRS data quality verification reports are run and
follow-on discussions to verify/validate data are
conducted for those states with significant changes.
BRS has a suite of user and system documentation
which describes the overall administration of the
data collection and management activities. The
documentation identifies which information, for
example, is mandatory versus optional and describes
how to enter the data into the system. All
information is provided to the appropriate state and
EPA regional user of the system. Training on use of
the systems is provided on a regular basis, usually
annually depending on the nature of system changes
and user needs.
hi February 1997, EPA's Office of the Inspector
General performed an audit of the Biennial
Hazardous Waste Data. They made several
recommendations which the Agency has acted on.
A Limitation of the data available in BRS is that
when a facility modifies its recycling or handling
operation thereby becoming excluded from the
definition of solid waste and/or changes its
regulatory status so that future reporting is not
required, that facility need no longer submit a
biennial report. However, that same facility could
still be recycling hazardous waste. This type of
change may lead to an underestimating of the
amount of hazardous waste safely recycled. The
Agency is monitoring BRS submissions to identify
facilities that reported in the previous cycle but not
in the current cycle. EPA will use various analytical
means to determine why reporting, either by the
facility as a whole or of a particular waste stream,
stopped.
IV-19
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Extensive improvements are underway for the
RCRA national databases. The OSW Platform
Conversion of national systems (Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act Information System
and BRS) will migrate data and interfaces to a more
supportable database platform, using Internet based
access methods. While the converted systems will
retain the essential data characteristics of the current
systems, the platform conversion will provide new
user interfaces that will help improve the quality of
the data as it is being created. In the longer term,
the RCRA program currently is in the process of
reinventing its information management needs and
systems through a joint initiative with the states
called WIN/INFORMED.
In the non-hazardous waste program, no
national databases are in place nor planned. The
baseline numbers for municipal solid waste source
reduction and recycling are developed using a
materials flow methodology employing data largely
from the Department of Commerce and can be
found in an EPA report titled "Characterization of
Municipal Solid Waste in the United States." The
report, including the baseline numbers and current
progress, is widely accepted among experts. Since
the report is produced by EPA, no reporting from
outside sources will be required. Quality assurance
and quality control is provided by the Department of
Commerce's internal procedures and systems. The
report prepared by the Agency is then reviewed by
a number of experts for accuracy and soundness.
Data limitations stem from the fact that the
baseline and annual progress numbers are based on
a series of models, assumptions, and extrapolations
and, as such, is not an empirical accounting of
municipal solid waste generated or recycled. Since
these numbers are widely reported and accepted by
experts, no new efforts to improve the data or the
methodology have been identified.
Assess Conditions in Indian Country
The Agency biannually updates an internal
database on the number of Tribes with
delegated/approved environmental programs; the
number of tribal environmental programs that EPA
has delegated/approved; the number of Tribal/EPA
Environmental Agreements; and the number of
Tribes that have developed similar plans for
environmental protection. The database is validated
against Agency Headquarters and Regional office
records (http://www.epa.gov/mdian/Programs.htm).
The Agency will work with its Indian Tribal
partners to collect baseline environmental
information as part of the overall strategy for
conducting comprehensive environmental
assessments in Indian Country. This information
will allow EPA and Tribes to better gauge the
environmental outcomes of our partnership for
public health and environmental protection. Much
of the information for the baseline assessment will
come from existing EPA data sources and will
conform to Agency quality assurance standards.
New data provided by the tribes or collected
specifically for the baseline assessment project will
be subject to QA/QC review.
Research
EPA has several strategies to validate and
verify performance measures in the area of
environmental science and technology research.
Most performance measures are verifiable through
quantitative means. For those measures that are
output-oriented, actual outputs or products can be
objectively verified. Because the major output of
research is technical information, primarily in the
form of reports, software, protocols, etc., key to the
validation and verification strategies is the
performance of both peer and quality assurance
reviews.
Peer reviews provide assurance during the pre-
planning, planning, and reporting of environmental
science and research activities that the work meets
peer expectations. Only those science activities and
IV-20
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
resulting information products that pass Agency
peer review are addressed and published. This
applies to program-level, project-level, and research
outputs. The quality of the peer review activity is
monitored by EPA to ensure that peer reviews are
performed consistently, according to Agency policy,
and that any identified areas of concern are resolved
through discussion or the implementation of
corrective action,
A quality assurance system is implemented at
all levels in the EPA research organization. The
Agency-wide quality assurance system is a
management system that provides the necessary
elements to plan, implement, document, and assess
the effectiveness of quality assurance and quality
control activities applied to environmental programs
conducted by or for EPA.
This quality management system provides for
identification of environmental programs for which
Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) is
needed, specification of the quality of the data
required from environmental programs, and
provision of sufficient resources to assure that an
adequate level of QA/QC is performed.
rv-21
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Goal: Better Waste Management, Restoration
of Contaminated Waste Sites, and Emergency Response
America's wastes will be stored, treated, and disposed of in ways that prevent harm to people and to the
natural environment. EPA will work to clean up previously polluted sites, restoring them to uses appropriate for
surrounding communities, and respond to and prevent waste-related or industrial accidents.
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
Tmproper waste management and disposal
J-threatens the health of people, endangers wildlife,
and harms vegetation and natural resources.
Uncontrolled hazardous and toxic substances,
including radioactive waste, often migrate to ground
water, surface water, and air. Consequently, they
affect streams, lakes, rivers, and water supplies.
Toxins bioaccumulate in fish or accumulate in
sediments. In 1999, EPA will promote safe waste
storage, treatment, and disposal, clean up active and
inactive waste disposal sites, and prevent the
creation of new waste sites.
MEANS AND STRATEGY
principal objective of this goal is to reduce or
^"Vcontrol the risks posed to human health and the
environment through better waste management
and restoration of abandoned waste sites. In
National Priorities List Status
(End of FY1998)
partnership with states, tribal governments, the
public, and other stakeholders,
EPA will reduce or control the risks to human health
and the environment at thousands of Superfund,
Brownfield, Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA), and underground storage
tank (UST) sites.
Remedial Assessment Not Begun
(58 sites)
41% Study Underway, Remedy
Selected or Design Underway
Construction Underway
(457 sites)
(327 sites)
22.9%
Construction Completion
(585 sites)
40.1%
To achieve this goal, EPA strives to
apply the fastest, most effective waste
management and cleanup methods
available, while involving affected
communities in the decision making
process.
Effective use of research and
enforcement strategies will also allow the
Agency to further reduce the risks from
exposures to hazardous waste. For more
information about these programs refer to
the following home pages:
http://www.epa. gov/swerrims and
http://www.epa. gov/oeca/hazsol.httnl
Another principal objective of this
goal is to prevent, reduce, and respond to
V-l
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
releases, spills, accidents or emergencies. Through
the UST, RCRA, and Oil programs, the Agency and
its partners manage the practices of thousands of
facilities to prevent dangerous releases to the
environment. When releases do occur, EPA and its
partners will have the capabilities to successfully
respond.
Goal 5 has been restructured by combining the
original objectives 2 and 3 of the Strategic Plan into
this objective. More information on these programs
can be found at the home page:
http://www.epa.gov/osw
Lead Raity At The Hire Of
Construction Cor
FT 1998
Responsible Party or
Mxed Fining Lead
(390 sites) eaffl/o^
Federal Facility Lead
(17 sites) 29%
Fund Lead (175 sites)
29.9%
Research
Research efforts will continue to focus on
ground water and soils research, which seeks to
understand the process that governs contaminant
transport and fate to improve remediation and
monitoring technologies, especially their cost-
effectiveness.
The principle areas of concentration are
exposure to soil and ground water contaminants,
assessment of the risks posed by these
contaminants, cost-effective management of these
risks, and the development of innovative
technologies to characterize and remediate
contaminated sites. Work will also continue under
active waste management and combustion facilities.
Through the development of new and improved
methods and models to assess exposure and effects,
this research will provide the fundamental science
and modeling backbone needed to conduct truly
multimedia, multi-pathway exposure modeling and
risk assessment.
Greater information about research and
development activities can be found at the following
Internet address:
v/ordntmt/ord
V-2
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as amended by the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
CERCLA (42 U.S.C. 9601-9675)
CERCLA, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. Section 9660
CERCLA Section 104 (a)
CERCLA Section 104 (b)
. CERCLA Section 104 (b)(l)
. CERCLA Section 104 (d)(l)
« CERCLA Section 111 (a)(l)
. CERCLA Section 311 (c), 42 U.S.C. 9660 D
CERCLA Section 311 (b)(9)(A)
. CERCLA Section 311 (b)(3)
Title HI (Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act) of CERCLA, as amended by Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended by the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), section 104.
Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended by Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. Section 6981.
RCRA, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. Section 6981
The 1984 Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendment to RCRA
OPA 33 U.S.C.A. Section 276
Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) (42 U.S.C. 13101-13109)
Subtitle I of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 to the Solid Waste Disposal Act. The
regulated substances are liquid petroleum products and substances defined as hazardous under the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability At of 1980, as amended under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976.
Clean Air Act, Section 112(r).
Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C.A., Section 7403.
Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 311.
Oil Pollution Act (OPA), 33 U.S.C. 2701-2761.
Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974: National Primary Interim Drinking Water Regulations (1976), MCL
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Land Withdrawal Act (Public Law 102-579 as amended by Public Law
104-201) 40 CFR194: Criteria for the Certification and Recertification of the WIPPs
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 42 USC 2011 et seq. (1970) and Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970
Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) of 1978 (an amendment to the Atomic Energy
Act), 42 USC 7901 et seq (1978)
Section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 4332
The Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Section 2905 (a) (1) (E) (10 U.S.C. 2687 Note).
V-3
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
STATUTORY AUTHORITY (CONTINUED)
Compliance with the Disposal Regulations (1996): Certification Decision (1998).
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 Public Law 97-425.
EnergyPolicy Act of 1992, Public Law 102-486 and Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. 551-
559,701-706.
Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) as amended.
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1998.
Title XTV of the National Defense Authorization Act of 1996 (Nunn-Lugar JH).
Resource Summary
(Dollars in thousands)
Better Waste Management, Restoration of Contaminated Waste
Sites, and Emergency Response
Reduce or Control Risks to Human Health
EPM
EPM-REM
S&T
STAG
LUST
OIL
SF
Prevent , Reduce and Respond to Releases, Spills, Accidents or
Emergencies
EPM
S&T
S&T-REIM
STAG
OIL
SF
Total Workyears:
FY1999
Pres. Budget
$2,256,934.3
$2,076,119.9
$42,645.0
$0.0
$6,761.2
$28,400.6
$69,128.7
$962.0
$1,928,222.4
$180,814.4
$111,190.9
$9,229.4
$0.0
$36,126.6
$15,818.2
$8,449.3
4,304.8
FY1999
Enacted
$1,655,913.5
$1,491,141.1
$42301.1
$0.0
$49,809.4
$24,808.8
$70,418.7
$962.0
$1,302,841.1
$164,772.4
$93,966.8
$8,797.6
$0.0
$38,038.4
$13,496.9
$10,472.7
4,316.9
V-4
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Reduce or Control Risks to Human
Health
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
RCRA Corrective Action
RCRA State Grants
Federal Preparedness
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST)Cooperative Agreements
Superfund Remedial Actions
Superfund Removal Actions
Federal Facilities
Assessments
Brownfields
ATSDR Superfund Support
NffiHS Superfund Support
Other Federal Agency Superfund Support
EMPACT
Superfund - Maximize PRP Involvement (including reforms)
Superfund - Cost Recovery
Superfund - Justice Support
Research: Hazardous Substance Research: Hazardous Substance
Research Centers
Research: Hazardous Substance Research: Superfund Innovative
Technology Evaluation (SITE)
Common Sense Initiative
$22,871
$28,401
$1,500
$57,700
$1,056,615
$328,434
$28,642
$92,720
$90,882
$64,000
$48,527
$10,492
$921.7
$96,267
$30,494
$29,664
$1,094
$7,683
$0
$18,167
$24,809
$1,500
$59,883
$588,190
$199,419
$28,642
$87,739
$89,606
$76,000
$60,000
$10,000
$398
$91,042
$30,494
$29,000
$1,067
$7,663
$136
V-5
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
COST RECOVERY
By 1999: Address cost recovery at all National Priority List (NPL) and non-NPL sites with a statute of
limitations on total past costs equal to or greater than $200,000.
Performance Measures: Target:
Address Cost Recovery at all NPL & Non-NPL sites w/tot. past costs = or > S200K 100% Cases
Baseline: In FY 97 the Agency will have addressed Cost Recovery at all NPL & Non-NPL sites with total past
costs equal or greater than $200,000.
PRP COMMITMENTS
By 1999: Obtain PRP commitments for 70% of the work conducted at new construction starts at non-Federal
facility sites on the NPL and emphasize fairness in the settlement process.
Performance Measures: Target:
Section 106 Civil Actions 38 Agreements
Orphan Share Offers at all eligible work settlement negotiations much obliged 100%
Settlements
De Minimis Settlements 23 Settlements
Remedial Admin. Orders 19 Orders
Baseline: In FY 97 approximately 70% of new remedial work at NPL sites (excluding Federal facilities) was
initiated by private parties.
LUST CLEANUPS
By 1999: Complete 22,000 Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) cleanups.
V-6
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Performance Measures: Target:
LUST cleanups completed. 22,000 USTs
Baseline: EPA completed a total of 178,297 LUST cleanups through 1997.
SUPERFUND SITES CONSTRUCTION
By 1999: EPA and its partners will maintain the pace of cleanups by completing construction at 85 additional
Superfund sites (for a cumulative total of 670 construction completions with a target of 925 construction
completions in 2002).
Performance Measures: Target:
Construction completions. 85 completions
Baseline: EPA and its partners completed 585 construction completions from 1982 through 1998.
RCRA FACILITIES
By 1999: 83 (for a cumulative total of 238 or 14%) of high priority RCRA facilities will have human
exposures controlled and 45 (for a cumulative total of 119 or 7%) will have groundwater releases controlled.
Performance Measures: Target:
High priority RCRA facilities with human exposures to toxins controlled. 83 facilities
High priority RCRA facilities with toxic releases to groundwater controlled. 45 facilities
Baseline: EPA established a baseline of 1,700 high-priority corrective action facilities in January 1999.
BROWNFIELDS SITE ASSESSMENT GRANTS
By 1999: EPA will fund Brownfields site assessments in 100 more communities, thus reaching 300
communities by the end of 1999.
V-7
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
RESEARCH: INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES
By 2001: Demonstrate and verify the performance of IS innovative technologies by 2001, emphasizing
remediation and characterization of ground-water and soils.
Performance Measures: Target:
Delivery of the Annual SITE Program Report to Congress 30-SEP-99
Baseline: Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently underway.
V-8
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Prevent, Reduce and Respond to Releases,
Spills, Accidents or Emergencies
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
RCRA Permitting
RCRA State Grants
Waste Combustion
Accident Safety/Prevention
Risk Management Plans
Federal Preparedness
Community Right to Know (Title HI)
Underground Storage Tanks (UST)
UST State Grants
Oil Spills Preparedness, Prevention and Response
Project XL
Common Sense Initiative
Civil Enforcement
Compliance Assistance and Centers
Research: Hazardous Waste Research
$11,931
$25,582
$8,003
$1,010
$11,871
$8,037
$5,351
$6,701
$10,545
$14,183
$110
$177
$1,271
$0
$7,051
$10,332
$27,494
$7,347
$0
$7,258
$9,560
$4,684
$6,078
$10,545
$11,988
$113
$130
$1,234
$275
$6,619
V-9
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
SPELL PREVENTION, CONTROL AND COUNTERMEASURE
By 1999: 190 additional facilities will be in compliance with spill prevention, control and countermeasure
(SPCC) provisions of the oil pollution regulations (for a cumulative total of 490 additional facilities since
1997).
Performance Measures: Target:
Facilities in SPCC compliance. 190 facilities
Baseline: More than 300 facilities were in compliance in 1998.
WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES PERMITTING
By 1999: 122 hazardous waste management facilities (for a cumulative total of 61% of 3,380 RCRA
facilities) will have permits or other approved controls in place.
Performance Measures: Target:
RCRA hazardous waste management facilities with permits or other approved controls in 122 facilities
place.
Baseline: EPA and its partners identified hazardous waste management facilities as of 1997. The baseline
will be finalized in 1999.
RESEARCH: CUMULATIVE EXPOSURE-RISK ASSESSMENT
By 1999: Complete prototype model for assessing cumulative exposure-risk assessment integrating the
environmental impact of multiple chemicals through multiple media and pathways.
Performance Measures: Target:
Beta version for comprehensive modeling system. 30-SEP-99
HWIR Human and Ecosystems Site (Generic) Exposure-Risk Assessment Screening Model, 30-SEP-99
peer reviewed and applied to HWIR listed chemical exit levels.
Baseline: Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently underway.
V-10
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
EXTERNAL FACTORS
r I ^here are a number of external factors that could
J- substantially impact the Agency's ability to
achieve the outlined objectives under this goal.
The external factors include, for example, heavy
reliance on state partnerships, development of new
environmental technology, commitment by other
federal agencies, or statutory barriers.
The Agency's ability to achieve its goals of
reducing risks posed by Superfund sites and
ensuring trust fund stewardship are partially
dependent upon the capacity of our partners. The
Agency's goals of achieving construction
completions, cost recoveries, and maximizing PRP
participation in clean-up efforts are heavily
dependent on the progress of PRP, state or Tribal
negotiations and the nature of contamination at NPL
sites. In addressing Federal facilities, internal
decision processes within other Federal agencies
such as the Department of Defense and the
Department of Energy would impact our goal of
other clean up activities.
The Agency's ability to achieve its goal of
reducing community risks from chemical accidents
is dependent on a number of factors, including: 1)
Delegating the response management plan (RMP)
review program to more states in 1999 will depend
upon those states enacting laws, allocating funds
and developing specific capabilities that will enable
them to review and audit risk management plans;
and 2) Industry's willingness to provide the strong
top-down leadership to make RMP compliance a
priority and commit the resources necessary to get
the job done.
The Agency's ability to achieve its RCRA goals
to prevent releases by proper facility management is
dependent on a number of factors, including: 1) In
most cases, states have received authorization
(hazardous waste management program) or
approval (municipal solid waste landfill permit
program) and are primary implementers of these
programs. As such, EPA relies heavily on states to
perform many of the activities needed to achieve
these targets. 2) The technology of Continuous
Emissions Monitors (CEMs) could affect the ability
of combustion facilities to monitor emissions and
provide data in a cost-effective manner. The
Agency is coordinating with ORD, DOE, and
private industry in these efforts. 3) The increased
flexibility provided to states to redirect resources
under the National Environmental Performance
Partnership System (NEPPS). If states redirect
resources away from this area, it would impact both
annual performance and progress implementing the
Agency's strategic plan.
V-ll
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
The Office of Underground Storage Tanks
(OUST) uses the following processes to verify and
validate performance measures data. Designated
State agencies submit semi-annual progress reports
to the EPA regional offices, who review, verify and
then forward the data to the OUST Headquarters.
OUST Headquarters staff examine the data and
resolve any discrepancies with the regional offices.
The data are displayed on a region by region basis,
which allows regional staff to verify their data.
OUST does not maintain a national database.
The performance results are also used in
OUST's Regional Strategic Overview (RSO)
process to assess the status of State progress in
implementing the program. This process is based
on strategic discussions that the program has with
the states, regarding how to continue to improve
states'performance, hi the mid-year and end of year
state evaluations, the Program discusses with states
their efforts to update and validate their data, and to
make continual improvements in their performance.
EPA relies on its state partners to provide our
measurement data which have been used by the
UST/LUST program for 10 years.
CERCLIS is the official database used by the
Agency to help track and store Superfund national
site information. The Agency is taking steps to
ensure that all Superfund accountability data are
rigorously validated. The database is used to track,
store, and report national accomplishment
information. EPA has defined the various roles and
responsibilities of key individuals who are
responsible for development, operation and
maintenance of CERCLIS.
The headquarterDs sponsor of CERCLIS data is
responsible for (1) identifying the data elements
needed, (2) defining the data elements, and (3)
informing the appropriate people that the
information needs to be collected and loaded into
CERCLIS. The regional person who owns and
enters the data (e.g., Superfund remedial project
manager) is responsible for reviewing, verifying,
and validating site data in CERCLIS.
The responsibility of the Information
Management Center, under the EPA's Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response (OERR), is to
ensure: (1) there is a data element with an accurate
definition for all data; (2) the data element is
accessible to searches and can be retrieved for
reports; (3) the source for the data is referenced in
the system; (4) the data is accurately entered or
converted into the system; (5) data from other
sources is considered draft until it has been checked
against its source data, and is found acceptable; and
(6) data integrity is maintained in all system
applications and reports.
The CERCLIS database is also used to help
track and store the Oil Spill Program performance
data. Entry of Oil Spill Program data into
CERCLIS began in 1993.
To assure data accuracy and control, the
following administrative controls are in place: (1)
Superfund/Oil Implementation Manual (SPM) -
This is the program management manual which
details what data must be reported; (2) Report
Specifications - Report specifications are published
for each report detailing how reported data are
calculated; (3) Coding Guide ~ It contains technical
instructions to data users such as regional MCs,
program personnel, report owners and data input
personnel; (4) Quality Assurance (QA) Unit Testing
-Unit testing is an extensive QA check made by the
report programmer to assure that its product is
producing accurate data that conforms to the current
specification; (5) QA Third Party Testing - Third
party testing is an extensive test made by an
independent QA tester to assure that the report
produces data in conformance with the report
V-12
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
specifications; (6) Regional CERCLIS Data Entry
Internal Control Plan The data entry internal
control plan includes: (a) regional policies and
procedures for entering data into CERCLIS; (b) a
review process to ensure that all Superfund
accomplishments are supported by source
documentation; (c) delegation of authorities for
approval of data input into CERCLIS; and (d)
procedures to ensure that reported accomplishments
meet accomplishment definitions.
Two audits, one by the Office Inspector General
(OIG) and the other by Government Accounting
Office (GAO), were done this past year to assess the
validity of the data in CERCLIS. The OIG audit
report "Superfund Construction Completion
reporting", No. E1SGF7-05-0102-8100030, was
performed to verify the accuracy of the information
that the Agency was providing to Congress and the
public regarding the construction completion
statistic.
The OIG concluded that the Agency "has good
management controls to ensure the accuracy of the
information that is reported. The GAO's report
"Superfund: Information on the Status of Sites",
GAO/RCED-98-241, also sought to review the
accuracy of the information in CERCLIS on sites'
cleanup progress. GAO tested the accuracy of data
in the CERCLIS system for a random sample of
NPL sites. On the basis of GAO's sample results,
GAO "estimates that the cleanup status of NPL
sites reported by the Superfund database is accurate
for 95% of the sites."
to 1999, the Agency will begin to improve the
Superfund program's technical information by
incorporating more site remedy selection, risk,
removal response, and community involvement
information in CERCLIS. Also, it will begin efforts
to share information among the Federal, state and
tribal programs. The additional information will
further enhance the Agency's efforts to efficiently
identify, evaluate and remediate Superfund
hazardous waste sites.
hi order to validate the Brownfields
performance measure data, the Outreach and Special
Projects Staff utilize data input and verification of
the Brownfields Management System (BMS) and
the CERCLIS system. The Brownfields
Management System is used to evaluate
management, environmental, and economically-
related results such as jobs generated and acres
assessed and cleaned up. BMS uses data gathered
from Brownfield pilots' quarterly reports and from
the Regions. The CERCLIS system records
Regional accomplishments on Brownfields
Assessments. Verification relies on reviews by
Regional staff responsible for pilot cooperative
agreements or Brownfields cooperative agreements
and contracts.
The Resource Conservation Recovery
Information System (RCRIS) is the national
database which supports EPA's RCRA program.
RCRIS contains information on entities (generically
referred to as "handlers") engaged in hazardous
waste generation and management activities
regulated under the portion of RCRA that provides
for regulation of hazardous waste. RCRIS has
several different modules, including a Corrective
Action Module which tracks the status of facilities
for which potential needs for corrective actions have
been identified.
For validation and verification within RCRIS,
controls include maintaining a high degree of
consistency in data elements over time as well as
data screen edits to help ensure that key data is
entered for all facilities. States and Regions, who
create the databases, manage data quality control.
RCRIS has a suite of user and system
documentation which describes the overall
administration of the data collection and
management activities. Training on use of the
systems is provided on a regular basis, usually
annually depending on the nature of system changes
and user needs.
RCRA data verification procedures ensure that
the data collected at the field or facility level are not
V-13
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
corrupted or confused before they are presented,
aggregated, and analyzed at the Federal level.
Environmental monitoring data will meet standard
Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC)
procedures for the RCRA program, as documented
in the Office of Solid Waste Quality Assurance
Management Plan and the Guidebook for QA/QC
Procedure for Submission of Data for the LDR
Program. These procedures, in part, define
requirements for sampling and analysis to assure
data quality.
Another common method of verification
involves examination of data collected and
evaluating the relationship of those data to other
data collected under similar circumstances.
Because the RCRA statute provides for
delegation of program implementation to die states,
the majority of data for the RCRA information
system (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System
(BRS), originates with and is received from the
states. In addition the system architectures provide
states with the ability to use software other man the
national software managed by EPA for their data
management activities provided that they supply the
mandatory data to EPA in the required quality and
format. The Agency consolidates data from the
states which is then used to construct the national
databases used for program oversight and public
information.
The national RCRA software provides a range
of functions to ensure data quality. Both systems
employ on-line data validation checks (e.g., range
limits, mandatory data entry for required elements
before saving of a record) to assure data type
integrity as well as batch edits (performed when
data is extracted and consolidated) to enforce
program rules requiring associated consistency
across data components for which on-line edits are
impracticable or inappropriate.
Beyond the system enforced data quality
controls, states and regions who implement the
program perform data validation reviews to ensure
that the data properly inventories the essential
program activities and is programmatically correct.
During periodic program reviews, EPA
headquarters also confirms the timeliness and
accuracy of key data elements which support
national program status reporting. Training on use
of the systems is provided on a regular basis,
usually annually, depending on the nature of system
changes and user needs.
The RCRA program is currently in the process
of reinventing its information management needs
and systems through a joint initiative with the states
called WIN/INFORMED. The scope of the
WIN/INFORMED project covers the activities and
information currently supported by the RCRIS and
BRS data systems. The RCRA program has been
divided into areas for analysis and
design/construction of new systems. Each analysis
under WIN/INFORMED includes the identification of
the data elements needed to support the
implementation and management of the RCRA
program; development of common, agreed upon
national definitions; identification of programmatic
process improvements; and tracking burden
reduction. The design and construction of new
systems will be based on the results of each
analysis. The systems will be designed flexibly so
where the program is still identifying data needed to
support a program activity, that information can
later be incorporated into the system after it has
been fully developed by the program.
The WIN/INFORMED project is scheduled to be
completed by the end of the calendar year 2002.
Analysis, design and construction will occur over
different times for each of the program areas. BRS
information will be analyzed in the Waste Activity
Monitoring (WAM) area which is scheduled to
begin in June, 1999. System construction for WAM
will be completed in 2001. Permitting/Corrective
Action information will be analyzed in the
Permitting/Corrective Action (PCA) area which is
scheduled to begin in January, 2000. System
construction for PCA will be completed during
2002.
V-14
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Non-hazardous waste management is delegated
to the states. Federal guidance is provided, but no
actual federal program implementation exists. For
this reason, individual states collect and verify data
on waste management practices for Industrial D and
municipal wastes in accordance with local needs.
The Agency receives aggregate data more indirectly
than in the case of hazardous waste, through reports,
studies, or statistical sampling rather than a national
data system.
Since states have implementation authority for
MSW programs, they know best the extent of
compliance within their jurisdictions. To measure
progress, the Agency must rely on the ability and
willingness of state regulatory programs to share
this knowledge.
Measuring the number of facilities that have
permits or other forms of approval issued to them
directly relates to the number of faculties with
approved controls in place. Approved controls
means compliance with the requirements of federal
regulations, Agency approved state permit program,
or other system of prior approval and conditions. In
1999, emphasis will be placed on approving State
programs that will lead to all MSW disposal
facilities having approved controls in place.
The Chemical Emergency Preparedness and
Prevention program uses the following processes
and data bases to collect and validate performance
data. Facilities will be required to submit
information on the chemical risks in their facilities
in 1999. This information will be placed in a
database mat will be accessible to Federal, state, and
local officials, as well as the public with safeguards
for sensitive information.
The information will be verified through
Regional and state audits and reports. LEPCs will
be contacted periodically to verify risk reduced in
their community. The Emergency Release
Notification System (ERNS) database will be used
to confirm releases reported in RMPs.
States and LEPCs will be surveyed to determine
the status of their chemical emergency preparedness
and prevention programs, including the steps taken
to integrate counter-terrorism planning A Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) database
will be monitored to determine if all hazard plans
include a counter-terrorism appendix. A database
will track the status of RMP state delegated
programs. Regions and headquarters will routinely
enter information on the status of state RMP
implementation plans, and Regions will ensure
quality of the data through quarterly reviews of the
states and random checks of LEPCs.
Research
Under Objectives 1 and 2, EPA has several
strategies to validate and verify performance
measures in the area of environmental science and
technology research. Most performance measures
are verifiable through quantitative means. For those
measures that are output-oriented, actual outputs or
products can be .objectively verified. Because the
major output of research is technical information,
primarily in (he form of reports, software, protocols,
etc., key to the validation and verification strategies
is the performance of both peer and quality
assurance reviews.
Peer reviews provide assurance during the pre-
planning, planning, and reporting of environmental
science and research activities that the work meets
peer expectations. Only those science activities and
resulting information products that pass Agency
peer review are addressed and published. This
applies to program-level, project-level, and research
outputs. The quality of the peer review activity is
monitored by EPA to ensure that peer reviews are
performed consistently, according to Agency policy,
and that any identified areas of concern are resolved
through discussion or the implementation of
corrective action.
A quality assurance system is implemented at
all levels in the EPA research organization. The
V-15
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Agency-wide quality assurance system is a programs for which Quality Assurance/Quality
management system that provides the necessary Control (QA/QC) is needed, specification of the
elements to plan, implement, document, and assess quality of the data required from environmental
the effectiveness of quality assurance and quality programs, and provision of sufficient resources to
control activities applied to environmental programs assure that an adequate level of QA/QC is
conducted by or for EPA. This quality management performed.
system provides for identification of environmental
V-16
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Goal: Reduction of Global and
Cross-Border Environmental Risks
The United States will lead other nations in successful, multilateral efforts to reduce significant risks to
human health and ecosystems from climate change, stratospheric ozone depletion, and other hazards of
environmental concern.
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
A ir, water, and waste pollution crossing our
ZJLboarders with Mexico and Canada can imperil
the health, environment and well-being of people in
the United States. Thus, international cooperation
is critical to achieving EPA's mission.
Depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer
increases the amount of the sun's ultraviolet
radiation reaching the earth's surface. Climate
change, pollution of the oceans and irreversible loss
of species and habitats worldwide undermine the
resource base critical to our well-being and quality
of life and deprive us of commercially
valuable and potentially life-saving genetic
materials. EPA's continued leadership is necessary
to build the international cooperation and technical
capacity that are essential to prevent harm to the
global environment and ecosystems that we share
with other nations.
A coordinated international response is needed
to confront the climate change threat, depletion of
the stratospheric ozone layer, transboundary
circulation of toxics, and other environmental issues
significant to the interests of the United States.
MEANS AND STRATEGY
T7cosystems and transboundry pollutants pose
-[-/serious environmental hazards to people,
communities and wildlife. These transboundry
pollutants are transported through air, water and
toxic substances and are not confined by
international boundaries. As a result, domestic
actions alone are inadequate to achieve some of
EPA's most important environmental goals.
To achieve our Agency goal of reducing cross-
border environmental risks requires us to work with
other countries to address external sources of
pollution impacting human health and the
environment of our nation.
EPA will use a variety of approaches to prevent
harm to the global environment and ecosystems
including:
1) formal bilateral and multilateral
environmental agreements, environmental foreign
policy initiatives, and regional and global
negotiations;
2) cooperating with other countries to ensure
that domestic and international environmental laws,
policies, and priorities are recognized and
implemented;
VI-1
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
3) working with other federal agencies, states,
business, and environmental groups to promote the
flow of environmentally sustainable technologies
and services worldwide, facilitating cooperative
research and development programs and
international technical assistance, training and
information exchange; and
4) promoting public/private partnership
programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Research
EPA's Global Change Research Program is
currently undergoing a major redirection towards a
more assessment-oriented program, with primary
emphasis on understanding the potential
consequences of climate variability and change on
human health, ecosystems, and socioeconomic
systems in the United States. EPA will also make
assessments of opportunities to reduce the risks or
take advantage of the opportunities presented by
climate variability and change.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
1990 Great Lakes Critical Programs Act
Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1251-1387)]
Clean Air Act (CAA) Title VI, Parts A and D (42 U.S.C. 7401-7431,7501-7515)
Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 etseq. - Section 104
Pollution Prevention Act of 1990,42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq. - Sections 6602,6603,6604,6605
Solid Waste Disposal Act, 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq. - Section 8001
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. - Section 102
Global Climate Protection Act of 1987,15 U.S.C. 2901 - Section 1103
Federal Technology Transfer Act, 15 U.S.C. - Section 3710a
U.S. Global Change Research Program Act of 1990
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
National Climate Program Act (1997)
Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) (42 U.S.C. 13101-13109)
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) sections 3001-3006 and 3017 (42 U.S.C. 6921-6926, 6938)
The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) section 313 (42 U.S.C. 11023)
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) sections 4,5,6,12, and 13 (15 U.S.C. 2603,2604,2605,2611,2612)
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC)
1996 Habitat Agenda, paragraph 43bb
U.S./Canada Agreements on Arctic Cooperation
1989 US/USSR Agreement on Pollution
1991 U.S./Canada Air Quality Agreement World Trade Organization Agreements
World Trade Organization Agreements
North American Free Trade Agreement
North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation
Treaties: The Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 and 1987 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement
VI-2
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Resource Summary
(Dollars in thousands)
Reduction of Global and Cross-border Environmental Risks
Reduce Transboundary Threats: Shared North American
Ecosystems
EPM
STAG
Climate Change
EPM
S&T
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
EPM
Protect Public Health and Ecosystems From Persistent Toxics
EPM
Achieve Cleaner and More Cost-Effective Practices
EPM
Total Workyears:
FY1999
Pres. Budget
$398,286.4
$120,392.3
$20^92.3
$100,000.0
$232,960.4
$163,237.5
$69,722.9
$26,914.3
$26,914.3
$6,883.2
$6,883.2
$11,136.2
$11,136.2
530.2
FY1999
Enacted
$229,366.9
$71,025.9
$21,025.9
$50,000.0
$127,968.9
$74347.9
$53,621.0
$17,033.8
$17,033.8
$4,125.8
$4,125.8
$9,212.5
$9,212.5
522.4
VI-3
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Reduce Transboundaiy Threats - Shared
North American Ecosystems
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Great Lakes National Program Office (CWAP)
Water Infrastructure: Mexico Border
U.S. - Mexico Border
Partnership with Industrial and Other Countries
$13,315
$100,000
$4,707
$1,642
$14,615
$50,000
$10,643
$784
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
MEXICAN BORDER
By 1999: 1 additional water/wastewater projects along the Mexican border will be certified for design-
construction.
Performance Measures: Target:
Projects certified for design-construction along the Mexican Border 1 Project
Baseline: As of 1998,24 Mexican border projects were either certified for design-construction or had received
grants or lAGs.
VI-4
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Climate Change
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Climate Change Technology Initiative: Buildings
Climate Change Technology Initiative: Transportation
Climate Change Technology Initiative: Industry
Climate Change Technology Initiative: Carbon Removal
Climate Change Technology Initiative: State and Local Climate Change
Program
Climate Change Technology Initiative: International Capacity Building
Partnership with Industrial and Other Countries
Research: CCTI RESEARCH (Office of Air and Radiation)
Research: Climate Change Research
$78,100
$58,900
$51,600
$3,400
$5,000
$8,400
$160
$0
$22,817
$38,800
$31,750
$18,600
$0
$2,900
$7,400
$409
$10,000
$16,671
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
U.S. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
By 1999: Reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 35 million metric ton carbon equivalent (MMTCE) per
year through partnerships with businesses, schools, state and local governments, and other organizations.
Performance Measures: Target:
Methane Programs - Annual Greenhouse Gas Reductions 8.5 MMTCE
HFC/PFC Programs-Annual Greenhouse Gas Reductions 11-5 MMTCE
ENERGY STAR Buildings and Green Lights - Annual Greenhouse Gas Reductions 3.9 MMTCE
ENERGY STAR Labeled Products - Annual Greenhouse Gas Reductions 4.8 MMTCE
Annual Greenhouse Gas Reduction (Climate Wise) - Production of 1999 US Greenhouse 4.4 MMTCE
Gas Inventory.
Annual Greenhouse Gas Reductions (Transportation) 1 -9 MMTCE
VI-5
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Baseline: The baseline for evaluating program performance is a forecast of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in
the absence of the Climate Change Action Plan programs. The baseline was developed as part of an
interagency evaluation of the Climate Change Action Plan in 1997, which built on a similar baseline forecast
that was developed in 1993 for the Climate Change Action Plan. The updated baseline includes updated energy
forecasts and economic growth projections. The baseline is discussed at length in the Climate Action Report
1997, which includes a discussion of differences in baselines between the original Climate Change Action Plan
and the 1997 baseline update.
RESEARCH: CLIMATE CHANGE ASSESSMENT
By 1999: Conduct preliminary assessment of consequences of climate change at three geographical locations:
(Mid-Atlantic, Gulf Coast, and upper Great Lakes).
Performance Measures: Target:
Conduct preliminary assessment of regional scale consequences of climate change at three 09/3 0/99
geographic locations (Mid-Atlantic, Gulf Coast, and upper Great Lakes). assessment
Baseline: Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently underway.
VI-6
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Multilateral Fund
EMPACT
Partnership with Industrial and Other Countries
$21,000
$382
$160
$11,362
$671
$337
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
CFC AND HALON REDUCTION
By 1999: Ensure that domestic consumption of class II HCFCs will be restricted to below 208,400 MTs and
domestic exempted production and import of newly produced class I CFCs and halons will be restricted to
below 130,000 MTs.
Performance Measures: Target:
Domestic Consumption of Class H HCFCs <208,400 MTs
Domestic Exempted Production and Import of Newly Produced Class I CFC s and Halons <130,000 MTs
Baseline: The base of comparison for assessing progress on the annual erformance goal is the domestic
consumption cap of class n HCFCs as set by the Parties to the Montreal Protocol. Beginning on January 1,
1996, the cap was set at the sum of 2.8 percent of the domestic ozone depletion potential (ODP)-weighted
consumption of CFCs in 1989 plus the OOP-weighted level of HCFCs in 1989. Consumption equals
production plus import minus export.
VI-7
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Protect Public Health and Ecosystems From
Persistent Toxics
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Global Toxics $3,312 $932
Partnership with Industrial and Other Countries $0 $ 100
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
PERSISTENT ORGANIC POLLUTANTS
By 1999: Obtain international agreement on criteria for selecting Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) to be
covered in a new global POPs treaty, and on capacity building activities to support the convention's
implementation
Performance Measures: Target:
Agreed USG policies on selection criteria for Persistent Organic Pollutants 09/30/99
negotiations
Baseline: POPs treaty negotiations are underway. Anticipate negotiations concluded 2001. Treaty ratification
2003-2005.
VI-8
-------
US. Environmental Protection Agency ^ 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Achieve Cleaner and More Cost-Effective
Practices
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999
Enacted
Environment and Trade
Partnership with Industrial and Other Countries
$3,178
$7,800
$4,515
$4,547
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
INTERNATIONAL TRAINING MODULES, ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES EXPORTS
By 1999: Deliver 30 international training modules; implement 6 tech assistance/ technology dissemination
projects; implement 5 co-op policy development project; & disseminate info products on US environmental
technologies and techniques to 2500 foreign customers
Performance Measures: Target:
Number of training modules delivered 30 modules
Number of tech assistance or tech dissemination projects carried-out 6 projects
Number of info products disseminated to foreign customers 2500 products
Number of capacity building activities scheduled for initiation in FY 2000 and beyond 2 reports
Baseline: During FY 1999, deliver 30 international training modules; implement 6 technical assistance or
technology dissemination projects; implement 5 cooperative policy development projects; and disseminate
information products on US environmental technologies and techniques to 2,500 foreign customers. The
purpose of these programs will be to reduce air, water, and waste problems in at least 6 environmentally and
geopolitically significant countries and to improve the cost-effectiveness of U.S. domestic programs.
VI-9
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
EXTERNAL FACTORS
The success of EPA's programs and activities
under Goal 6 will depend on active
participation by other nations, both developed
and developing countries. Reduction of air, water,
and waste problems along with the U.S. border with
Mexico will require continued commitment by
national, regional and local environmental officials
in that country.
Similarly, EPA's efforts to reduce global and
regional threats to oceans and the atmosphere will
require active cooperation of other countries. Health
and environmental benefits resulting from the multi-
billion dollar U. S. investment to reduce emissions of
stratospheric ozone depleting compounds could be
completely undone by unabated emissions of these
chemicals in other countries.
Fortunately, the Montreal Protocol on
Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer has
secured the participation of most countries,
including major producers and consumers of these
chemicals.
While many factors outside of EPA or U.S.
control determine a nation's willingness to
participate in international environmental protection
efforts (e.g., economic or political considerations
within the country), EPA's international policy and
technical exchange programs can play an important
role in convincing particular nations of both the
need and feasibility of participating.
Other factors affecting EPA's programs under
Goal 6 include continued Congressional and public
support; cooperation with other Federal agencies,
such as the State Department and the U.S. Agency
for International Development; and collaboration
with state and local groups, business and industry
groups, and environmental organizations.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Performance measures for the Great Lakes
program are derived from open lake
measurements taken by GLNPO and from
annual programmatic analysis of activities pursuant
to the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, the
Binational Toxics Strategy, and the GLNPO
programs for information management, sediments,
and habitat. Individual projects which generate are
required to comply with the Agency's standards for
quality assurance and control. Project data is
entered into the Great Lakes Environmental
Monitoring Database (GLENDA), and project
information generated through grants and contracts.
A QA/QC tracking system is in place to ensure
that QA/QC requirements are part of all applicable
GLNPO projects. GLNPO uses its annual planning
process as a check on performance from indirect
performance measures. The GLNPO performance
measures are written into Great Lakes State
Environmental Performance Partnership
Agreements as commitments.
GLNPO provides the states with assessments of
progress against those commitments. Under the
GLNPO structure, each of the GLNPO programs
conducts an end of year review of its progress
regarding identified measures and activities, draws
conclusions, and makes recommendations to
management regarding the subsequent year's
activities and measures. Management ultimately
determines what the activities and measures will be
for the succeeding year.
EPA has several strategies to validate and
verify performance measures for the Climate change
Program. At the national level, the primary
mechanism for monitoring overall changes in
VI-10
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
greenhouse gas emissions is the annual greenhouse
gas inventory that is developed by EPA in
coordination with other government agencies and
departments. The EPA greenhouse gas inventory
serves as the official U.S. government submission to
the United Nations.
Within the voluntary programs, EPA monitors
and evaluates accomplishments based on extensive
information provided by partners. For example, the
Green Lights partners provide detailed information
on investments and energy savings from over
14,000 completed energy-efficiency projects (e.g.,
the annual kilowatt-hour savings from completed
lighting upgrades). These standardized reports on
energy efficiency projects can be easily translated
into annual emission reductions by applying the
appropriate emission factor (Ibs/kWh) for each
pollutant of concern.
The voluntary programs continually use the
information collected to improve the program's
performance and more accurately assess its future
potential.
Another measure of progress for the voluntary
programs is obtained by using the Voluntary
Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Program developed
by the Energy Information Agency under the 1992
Energy Policy which reports the results and
achievements of individual companies. Through
this program, companies submit reports directly to
the Energy Information Agency which reviews them
for accuracy and to ensure plausibility.
Stratospheric ozone measurements are based on
atmospheric models and data provided by the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA), National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), the World Meteorological
Organization, and the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP) where available. Actual
measurements of stratospheric ozone will be made
by NASA's Upper Atmospheric Research Satellite
and the Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer, and
also by the Solar Backscatter Ultraviolet
Spectrometer-2 and Operational Vertical Sounder
instruments on the NOAA Polar Orbiting
Environmental Satellite and subsequent National
Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite.
Progress on the restriction of domestic
exempted production and importation of newly
produced class I CFCs, batons, methyl chloroform,
carbon tetrachloride, and HBFCs, will be tracked by
monitoring industry reports in compliance with
EPA's phaseout regulations. Progress on the
restriction of domestic production and importation
of methyl bromide and class II HCFCs will be
tracked by monitoring industry reports in
compliance with EPA's phaseout regulations.
Production data is cross-checked through
facility inspections and comparison with
International Trade Commission data. Import data
is cross-checked by comparison with U.S. Customs
information. Results from the tracking system are
compiled and published in annual UNEP reports.
Progress on international implementation goals
will be measured by tracking the number of
countries receiving assistance, dollars allocated to
each, and the expected reduction in ODSs in
assisted countries.
VI-11
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
The annual performance goals and measures
identified under this objective are expressed as the
completion of explicit tasks. These measures
require assessment by program staff and
management. Verification of these measures does
not involve any pollutant database analysis, but will
require objective assessment of tasks completed,
compliance with regulatory development and
authority delegation schedules, and the satisfaction
of U.S. environmental negotiating objectives.
Research
EPA has several strategies to validate and
verify performance measures in the area of
environmental science and technology research.
Because the major output of research is technical
information, primarily in the form of reports,
software, protocols, etc., key to these strategies is
the performance of both peer reviews and quality
reviews to ensure that requirements are met.
Peer reviews provide assurance during the
pre-planning, planning, and reporting of
environmental science and research activities that
the work meets peer expectations. Only those
science activities and resulting information products
that pass Agency peer review are addressed and
published. This applies to program-level,
project-level, and research outputs. The quality of
the peer review activity is monitored by EPA to
ensure that peer reviews are performed consistently,
according to Agency policy, and that any identified
areas of concern are resolved through discussion or
the implementation of corrective action.
The Agency's expanded focus on peer review
helps ensure that the performance measures listed
here are verified and validated by an external
organization. This is accomplished through the use
of the Science Advisory Board (SAB) and the Board
of Scientific Counselors (BOSC). The BOSC,
established under the Federal Advisory Committee
Act, provides an added measure of assurance by
examining the way the Agency uses peer review, as
well as the management of its research and
development laboratories.
In 1998, the Agency presented a new
Agency-wide quality system in Agency Order
5360.1/chg 1. This system provided policy to ensure
that all environmental programs performed by or for
the Agency be supported by individual quality
systems that comply fully with the American
National Standard, Specifications and Guidelines
for Quality Systems for Environmental Data
Collection and Environmental Technology
Programs (ANSI/ASQC E4-1994).
The order expanded the applicability of quality
assurance and quality control to the design,
construction, and operation by EPA organizations of
environmental technology such as pollution control
and abatement systems; treatment, storage, and
disposal systems; and remediation systems. This
rededication to quality provides the needed
management and technical practices to assure that
environmental data developed in research and used
to support Agency decisions are of adequate quality
and usability for their intended purpose.
A quality assurance system is implemented at
all levels in the EPA research organization. The
Agency-wide quality assurance system is a
management system that provides the necessary
elements to plan, implement, document, and assess
the effectiveness of quality assurance and quality
control activities applied to environmental programs
conducted by or for EPA. This quality management
system provides for identification of environmental
programs for which Quality Assurance/Quality
Control (QA/QC) is needed, specification of the
quality of the data required from environmental
programs, and provision of sufficient resources to
assure that an adequate level of QA/QC is
performed.
Agency measurements are based on the
application of standard EPA and ASTM
VI-12
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
methodology as well as performance-based
measurement systems. Non-standard methods are
validated at the project level. Internal and external
management system assessments report the efficacy
of the management system for quality of the data
and the final research results. The quality assurance
annual report and work plan submitted by each
organizational unit provides an accountable
mechanism for quality activities. Continuous
improvement in the quality system is accomplished
through discussion and review of assessment results.
The Office of Research and Development
Management Information System (OMIS) will be
another accountability tool used to monitor and
track performance measures. The GPRA structure
will be incorporated into OMIS to ensure consistent
maintenance and reporting, resulting in greater
accuracy and consistency of information to users.
VI-13
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Goal: Expansion of Americans'
Right to Know
Easy access to a wealth of information about the state of their local environment will expand citizen
involvement and give people tools to protect their families and their communities as they see fit. Increased
information exchange between scientists, public health officials, businesses, citizens, and all levels of
government will foster greater knowledge about the environment and what can be done to protect it.
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
Providing all Americans with access to sound
environmental information and informing and
involving the public in our work are essential
parts of a comprehensive approach to protecting
the environment.
This goal is premised on the concept that the
public has a "right-to-know" about the pollutants
in their environment, including land, air and water
pollution as well as potential health effects of the
chemicals used in the food they consume and
everyday products they purchase. This premise is
especially important to minority, low-income, and
Native American communities that suffer a
disproportionate burden of health consequences
from poor environmental conditions.
The Agency believes the public has the right
to receive adequate knowledge of and be
represented in public policy and environmental
decision-making processes.
MEANS AND STRATEGY
Access to environmental information enables
the public to make informed decisions about
their local environment. It also promotes creative
and lasting solutions to environmental risks,
opportunities for preventing pollution, and
sustainable solutions to environmental problems.
The principal accomplishment of this goal
will be to empower state, local, and tribal
governments and the public by providing
information to enable them to make informed
decisions regarding environmental issues in their
communities. EPA will improve the quality and
increase the quantity of general environmental
education, outreach and data availability.
EPA will also expand the content of its data
holdings, improve the quality and usability of the
data, and ensure the data are widely available
through the Internet and other sources.
EPA relies heavily on partnerships with the
states, tribes, local governments and regulated
parties to protect the environment and human
health. EPA's success depends on the ability of
these entities to obtain access to the decision-
making process as it relates to their local
environment.
In addition, EPA relies upon key information
management reforms that are essential to support
the Agency's new approaches to environmental
VII-1
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
protection. Examples of key management reforms
designed to improve the availability of
major systems and subsequent information
collection and data integration. The Agency is
promoting the implementation of advanced
technology, including the Internet, to disseminate
environmental information at the local level.
In the longer term, new technology,
unanticipated complexity or magnitude of
technological, partnership or environmental
problems or newly identified environmental
problems and priorities could affect the time
frame for achieving the Goal 7 Objectives.
Therefore, the ability of the Agency to
achieve its strategic goal of expansion of
Americans' Right-to-Know about their
environment is influenced by several factors over
which the Agency has only partial or no control.
As such, success of EPA programs depends on the
voluntary cooperation and collaboration of the
private sector and the general public and is
ultimately determined by increased understanding
and actions by the public about their environment.
We believe that with increased education,
outreach and data availability, the public will be
able to participate in the decisions to solve the
Nation's environmental problems.
environmental performance data to the public
include implementation of data standards for
Research
EPA's research efforts under this goal include
the President's Environmental Monitoring for
Public Access and Community Tracking
(EMPACT) Program, and the Integrated Risk
Information System (IRIS).
EMPACT is a cross-Agency program
established to pilot strategies to provide time
relevant, multi-media environmental information
to a broad spectrum of the American public in
metropolitan areas across the nation.
IRIS is an EPA database of Agency consensus
health information on environmental
contaminants which is used extensively EPA
Program Offices and Regions where consistent,
reliable toxicity information is needed for credible
risk assessments. Also under this goal, guidance
and support will be provided to risk assessors
through the provision of risk assessment
guidelines, expert consultation and support, and
risk assessment training.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
Clean Air Act (CAA) and amendments (42 U.S.C. 7601 -7671 q)
Clean Water Act (CWA) and amendments (33 U.S.C. 1251-1387)
Clinger-Cohen Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (42 U.S.C. 9601-
9675)
Computer Security Act
Congressional Review Act (CRA)
CPRKA of 1986
Electronic Freedom of Information Act
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) (42 U.S.C. 11001-11050)
Environmental Education Act
Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Act (ERDDA) of 1981
Executive Order 12866
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. App.)
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) Section 408 (21 U.S.C. 346A)
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 136-136y)
FMFIA
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
STATUTORY AUTHORITY (CONTINUED)
Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA)
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552) Results Act (GPRA)
National Environmental Education
Government Performance and Results Act
North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation
Paperwork Reduction Act and Paperwork Reduction Act Amendment of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520)
Plain Language Executive Order
Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) (42 U.S.C. 13101-13109)
Privacy Act
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (42 U.S.C. 6901-6992k)
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and amendments (42 U.S.C. 300f-300j-26)
SARA
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (15 U.S.C. 2601-2692)
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Resource Summary
(Dollars in thousands)
Expansion of Americans' Right to Know About their
Environment
Increase Quality/Quantity of Education, Outreach, Data
Availability
EPM
SF
Improve Public's Ability to Reduce Exposure
EPM
Enhance Ability to Protect Public Health
EPM
S&T
SF
Total Workyears:
FY1999
Pres. Budget
$158,923.3
$75,522.7
$73,094.2
$2,428.5
$49,959.0
$49,959.0
$33,441.6
$12,834.5
$20,221.3
$385.8
736.2
FY1999
Enacted
$133,467.4
$67,818.7
$65,865.8
$1,952.9
$42,247.7
$42,247.7
$23,401.0
$11,640.6
$11,517.3
$243.1
720.8
VII-3
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Increase Quality/Quantity of Education,
Outreach, Data Availability
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
EMPACT
Superfimd - Maximize PRP Involvement (including reforms)
Information Technology Management
Reinventing Environmental Information (REI)
SBREFA
Small Business Ombudsman
Center for Environmental Statistics (CEIS)
Environmental Education
GLOBE
1999 Pres Bud
$7,230
$364
$6,744
$17,704
$703
$987
$4,355
$8,478
$1,000
1999 Enacted
$1,202
$364
$4,235
$12,548
$760
$1,110
$3,966
$7,768
$0
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
By 1999: Provide over 100 grants to assist communities with understanding and addressing
Environmental Justice issues.
Performance Measures: Target:
EJ Community Grants 100 Grants
Baseline: The percentage of enforcement policy & guidance documents that are available through the
Internet is based on the number of completed documents in the given year. In 1998 there were 650
facilities in SFIP which have their information available through the SFIP web-site. These documents
provide information to populations suffering disproportionately from adverse health & environmental
effects. In 1999 each region will be required to report on the meetings held in disproportionately
disadvantaged communities & this information will provide a baseline for future years.
VII-4
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ;ppp Final Annual Plan
ONE-STOP REPORTING
By 1999: The Agency will streamline and improve the information reporting process between state
partners and EPA by increasing the number of participants to the One Stop Reporting Program (for a total
of 29).
Performance Measures: Target:
Number of States participants in the One Stop Reporting Program. 29 States
Baseline: 29 State participants in 1999.
Strategic Objective: Improve Public's Ability to Reduce
Exposure
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Drinking Water Consumer Awareness $2,304 $1,366
Pesticide Registration $5,460 $5,214
Pesticide Re-registration $5,108 $5,462
Toxic Release Inventory / Right-to-Know (RtK) $19,752 $19,800
EMPACT $5,000 $614
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
RIGHT To KNOW REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
By 1999: Increase compliance with right to know reporting requirements by conducting 1,300 inspections
and undertaking 200 enforcement actions.
Performance Measures: Target:
600 Inspections
Section 313 Inspections
200 APO
EPCRAAPO Complaints Complaints
VII-5
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Baseline: The number of inspections conducted annually has remained fairly consistent in recent years.
This information is the basis for the 2000 projections, with adjustments made for changes in resource
levels. In 2000, the enforcement program will target 50% of its inspections to priority areas. These areas
will be identified in an internal guidance document which sets forth specific priorities for 2000 and forms
the basis for this calculation..
CONSUMER CONFIDENCE REPORT REGULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS
By 1999: EPA will partner with the states in implementation activities that will ensure all public water
systems large, medium, and especially small are informed of both the requirements of the consumer
confidence report regulation and implementation tools for complying with this rule.
Performance Measures: Target:
Number of states with which EPA has an agreement on the most efficient and effective 50 States
methods (e.g., training, outreach) for implementing this rule in each state
Baseline: The final rule for drinking water consumer confidence reports was promulgated in August 1998.
ENHANCING COMMUNITY RIGHT To KNOW AND EFFICIENTLY PROCESSING INFORMATION
FROM INDUSTRY
By 1999: Process 110,000 facility chemical release reports, publish the TRI Data Release Report and
provide improved information to the public about TRI chemicals, enhancing community right to know and
efficiently processing information from industry.
Performance Measures: Target:
TRI Public Data Release 1997 Rept.
Published
Form R's Processed 110,000 Forms
Baseline: Number of facilities reporting and number of chemicals included in TRI compared with prior
year; types of public access methods and percent magnetic reporting prior year.
VII-6
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Enhance Ability to Protect Public
Health
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Small, Minority, Women-Owned Business Assistance
Research: EMPACT
$2,149
$15,002
$2,064
$6,390
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
RESEARCH: GRANTS To EMPACT CITIES
By 1999: Complete 5-7 monitoring pilot projects in EMPACT cities, implement timely and high quality
environmental monitoring technology in 5-7 EMPACT cities.
Performance Measures:
Award 5-7 grants to EMPACT cities to implement timely and high quality
environmental monitoring technologies.
Target:
5-7 Grants
Baseline: Perfor. Baseline: Citizens in at least 75 of the USA's larger metropolitan areas are in need of
access to clear, time-relevant, useful, and accurate environmental monitoring data in an on-going and
sustainable manner. Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently
underway.
EXTERNAL FACTORS
EPA relies heavily on partnerships with
states, tribes, local governments and regulated
parties to protect the environment and human
health. EPA's success depends on the ability of
these entities to obtain access to the
decision-making process as it relates to their local
environment Key management reforms are being
implemented to improve the availability of
environmental performance data to the public,
including establishing data standards for major
systems, information collection and data
integration.
The Agency is promoting the implementation
of advanced technology, including the Internet, to
disseminate environmental information at the
local level. New technology, unanticipated
complexity or magnitude of technological,
partnership or environmental issues and priorities
could all effect the time frame for achieving the
Goal 7 objectives.
The ability of the Agency to achieve its
strategic goal of expansion of American's right to
environmental information is influenced by
factors the Agency has only partial or no control
over. The success of EPA programs depends on
the voluntary cooperation and collaboration of the
VII-7
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
private sector and the general public. The success
of the Agency public outreach efforts is ultimately
determined by increased understanding and
actions by the public about their environment.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Data Availability
Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis
(IDEA) provides on-line access to compliance
and enforcement information for most EPA
national systems. The enforcement program's use
of the data, for screening, analysis and regional
evaluations, provides valuable feedback to help us
identify and correct problems.
Documents placed on the Internet must
have management approval before public
release. These document and data sources
reside in EPA Headquarters and regional
offices, compliance and enforcement
databases, states and other government
agencies. The measurement of progress made
toward our targets can be verified at any point
in time. Each of our targets for this goal is
based upon a number of facilities, states, etc.,
which can be tallied at any point in time.
This allows for ready tracking of our
progress toward our final goals.
The Agency's Public Access
Project, currently being implemented,
is designed to make all policies,
guidance and site-specific
determinations available to the public
through the Internet.
For instance, the data from the
Sector Facility Indexing Project (SFIP),
which is based on numerous reviews by
EPA, states and industry, captures the
most current and complete data before
being released to the public. SFIP is
focused on five sectors. Therefore,
while the data for these specific sectors is strong,
it represents a small subset of our overall data.
Additionally, a list is maintained of state
participants in the One Stop Reporting Program.
Data Enhancement
The approach to validate progress in reaching
Agency performance targets will rely on the
Agency's automated performance measure system
to capture programmatic and customer service
outcomes. The system will require periodic
updating of performance data. Performance
information will be collected and evaluated
against targets on a quarterly basis. The
collection of performance data
will involve a variety of methods, such as
customer service surveys. Customer service
surveys will be conducted annually to measure
customer service satisfaction with management
and administrative services. The results of the
07. I am most interested in enviroiinenlal quality infonretor
«the national level /n (he regional level In rty state Inrrycarmrity No response
VII-8
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
customer service survey will be
used to validate performance
measures.
Verification and validation are
important aspects of the right-to-
know program. Most performance
measures are verifiable through
quantitative means. For those
measures that are output-oriented,
actual outputs or products can be
counted or otherwise objectively
verified. For example, the Toxic
Release Inventory System (TRIS)
tracks progress in processing the
110,000 Form R's submitted each
year. In cases such as the data
quality measure, verification
procedures are built into the data
entry process both at the respondent
Q8. Would you describe youreetf as someone who is:
VayfanfflarwHh Famffiarwitti EPA Unfamiliar with Dcritknow? No response
EPA data/info data/info EPA data/Mb
M
c
o
VI
ft
u
in
to
o
o
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
level and when the data are entered into the
national TRIS database. Edit procedures internal
to the reporting form help confirm whether data
entered are internally consistent.
If this is not true, an error message is
generated. Once data are entered into the national
database, they are compared with those previously
submitted to learn whether large increases or
decreases at the largest TRI facilities have
occurred. In cases where there are unusually large
changes relative to previous reports submitted,
facilities are contacted by staff members to verify
the information. These and other similar data
quality checks together serve to verify and
validate data that EPA collects and disseminates.
The TRI component of the right-to-know
program generates data that inform the public
about what occurs in their communities. Data
collected and disseminated under TRI are used by
a wide variety of parties, including other Federal
agencies, state and local governments,
environmental, labor and community groups, and
academics. In order to facilitate appropriate usage
of the data, EPA publishes various analyses as
part of the annual data release.
Research
EPA has several strategies to validate and
verify performance measures in the area of
environmental science and technology research.
Most performance measures are verifiable
through quantitative means. For those measures
that are output-oriented, actual outputs or
products can be objectively verified. Because the
major output of research is technical information,
primarily in the form of reports, software, or
protocols key to the validation and verification
strategies is the performance of both peer and
quality assurance reviews.
Peer reviews provide assurance during the
pre-planning, planning, and reporting of
environmental science and research activities that
the work meets peer expectations. Only those
science activities and resulting information
products that pass Agency peer review are
addressed and published. This applies to program-
level, project-level, and research outputs.
The quality of the peer review activity is
monitored by EPA to ensure that peer reviews are
performed consistently, according to Agency
policy, and that any identified areas of concern are
resolved through discussion or the
implementation of corrective action.
A quality assurance system is implemented at
all levels in the EPA research organization. The
Agency-wide quality assurance system is a
management system that provides the necessary
elements to plan, implement, document, and
assess the effectiveness of quality assurance and
quality control activities applied to environmental
programs conducted by or for EPA. This quality
management system provides for identification of
environmental programs for which Quality
Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) is needed,
specification of the quality of the data required
from environmental programs, and provision of
sufficient resources to assure that an adequate
level of QA/QC is performed.
VII-10
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Goal: Sound Science, Improved
Understanding of Environmental Risk, and Greater
Innovation to Address Environmental Problems
EPA will develop and apply the best available science for addressing current and future environmental
hazards, as well as new approaches toward improving environmental protection.
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
Science allows us to identify the most important
sources of risk to human health and the
environment, and thereby guides our priorities,
policies, and deployment of resources. Science
provides the understanding and technologies needed
to detect, abate, and avoid environmental problems.
In the future, environmental problems will be
dealt with using those features of the current system
that have proven effective and by designing and
testing fundamentally new tools and approaches mat
utilize the latest advances in scientific knowledge
and technology.
MEANS AND STRATEGY
EPA has several strategies to strengthen its
science base and to develop innovations in
environmental protection that will allow
achievement of our strategic objectives. The
Agency has implemented a risk-based research
planning process to use risk assessment and risk
management as principal priority-setting criteria.
EPA conducts annual research program reviews to
both evaluate the status and accomplishments of its
research and determine strategic planning priorities.
To better draw upon expertise of the
environmental academic community, EPA created
the Science to Achieve Results (STAR) Program of
peer-reviewed, mission-driven extramural grants.
The Agency is also working with the National
Research Council to identify emerging
environmental issues for which we must begin
planning the necessary research. EPA's research
program will increase our understanding of
environmental processes and our capability to assess
environmental risks - not only to human health, but
also to ecosystems.
The emphasis of ecological monitoring research
will shift from a Mid-Atlantic integrated assessment
of ecosystem health to a Western Pilot
demonstration of methods developed in the Mid-
Atlantic, hi addition, the Coastal Monitoring
Initiative beginning in 2000 will fund the first
national demonstration of the status and trends
monitoring of the health of U.S. estuaries. Knowing
the current conditions of these ecosystems, how best
to measure those conditions, and what problems
exist are important parts of this effort and will
provide essential input to the modeling and
assessment elements of the program. Process and
modeling research will seek to explain stressors and
their effect on an ecosystem, as well as the way in
which they cause that effect.
EPA also is committed to developing and
verifying innovative methods and models for
vm-i
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
assessing the susceptibilities of populations to
environmental agents, aimed at enhancing current
risk assessment and management strategies and
guidance. In response to the heightened awareness
and concern over children's health risks and the
provisions of the new legislation on food safety,
EPA established the Children's Health Research
Program. In collaboration with the National
Institute for Environmental Health Sciences
(NIEHS), EPA plans to continue to operate pediatric
environmental health centers which conduct basic
and applied research in combination with
community-based prevention efforts that focus on
identifying and preventing environment-related
diseases in children. EPA will establish one
additional center in addition to the eight existing
centers. Children's health research efforts focus on
asthma, developmental disorders, and cancer.
The Agency will establish research capability
and mechanisms to anticipate and identify
environmental or other changes that may portend
future risk. A clear vision of future environmental
risk will enable EPA to manage strategically for
tomorrow and tactically for today. Substantial
capability to discern "early warnings" and patterns
of change will be developed through work
undertaken on endocrine disrupters. Benefits will
include an improved framework for decision-
making, increased ability to anticipate and perhaps
deter serious environmental risks, and enhanced
communication with the public and other
stakeholders.
In order to promote decisions which place a
high priority on pollution prevention, research will
focus on the development of methods and decision
tools that are more quantitative and easier for
stakeholders and decision-makers to use than those
currently available. Research on pollution
prevention technology and approaches will
accelerate the adoption and incorporation of
pollution prevention by developing, testing, and
demonstrating techniques applicable across
economic sectors. This research will test the ability
of risk assessors and risk managers to develop tools
and methodologies which are meaningful and
understandable to the public in terms of the costs
and benefits associated with the magnitude of the
risk reduction options.
A key element of EPA's strategy for reinvention
is testing and adopting innovative policy tools
designed to achieve better protection at less cost.
The Agency has a number of new tools and
approaches that are being tested or implemented in
various environmental programs, including: market
trading and banking, third party certification of
environmental performance, and recognition and
incentives for environmental stewardship, hi each
area, EPA is looking to advance the application of
the innovative tool or approach by promoting
broader testing and incorporation into our system of
environmental protection. For example, EPA's
Permit Action Plan outlines a broad strategy for
building the next generation of environmental
permitting. This strategy will harmonize
requirements across media, and will make
permitting more accessible to the public and more
flexible for facilities.
Sector strategies complement current EPA
activities by allowing the Agency to approach issues
more holistically; tailor efforts to the particular
characteristics of each sector; identify related groups
of stakeholders with interest in a set of issues; link
EPA's efforts with those of other agencies; and craft
new approaches to environmental protection.
Sustainable industry programs serve as
incubators and developers of innovative approaches
to environmental policy making, testing alternative
regulatory and programmatic approaches through
regional projects, and multi-stakeholder processes.
The experience gained in working with six industry
sectors on the Common Sense Initiative provides the
basis for moving forward with sector-based
approaches to environmental protection.
Vffl-2
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Also, President Clinton created Project XL in
March 1995 to provide regulated entities and other
stakeholders with the opportunity to develop and
implement alternative environmental management
strategies that achieve superior environmental
performance in exchange for
regulatory flexibility. Sector-based
approaches will offer valuable
supplements to traditional
environmental policy and may
become the predominant means for
environmental protection in the 21 st
century.
to reducing hazardous emissions, waste, and
pesticide risks. These efforts are good for the
environment, make good business sense, and prove
that pollution prevention pays.
Nearly 7,000 businesses, trade
association, citizens groups, state
and local governments, and
universities are volunteering to
improve environmental performance
in a timely, cost-effective way
through an array of EPA
partnership programs. Known
collectively as Partners for the
Environment, these programs
complement traditional regulatory
approaches to environmental
protection.
Partners set practical,
meaningful goals to improve and
better protect the environment
from conserving water and energy
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
Clean Air Act
Clean Air Act Amendment
Clean Water Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability
Act (CERCLA)
Economy Act of 1932
Environmental Research, Development and Demonstration Act
(ERDDA)ofl981
Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide At (FIFRA)
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
Federal Technology Transfer Act
. FFDCAofl988
Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996
. FQPA of 1996
MPRSA section 33 U.S.C. 26
National Environmental Policy Act
Patent Statute
Pollution Prevention Act of 1990
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Resources Conservation and Recovery Act
Safe Drinking Water Act
Section 309 of the Clean Air Act.
Superfund Amendments Reauthorization Act
Toxic Substances Control Act
vin-3
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Resource Summary
(Dollars in thousands)
Sound Science, Improved Understanding of Env. Risk and
Greater Innovation to Address Env. Problems
Research for Ecosystem Assessment and Restoration
S&T
SF
Research for Human Health Risk Assessment
EPM
S&T
SF
Research to Detect Emerging Risk Issues
EPM
S&T
SF
Pollution Prevention and New Technology for Environmental
Protections
EPM
S&T
SF
Increase Use of Integrated, Holistic, Partnership Approaches
EPM
Increase Opportunities for Sector Based Approaches
EPM
S&T
SF
Regional Enhancement of Ability to Quantify Environmental
Outcomes
EPM
SF
FY1999
Pres. Budget
$322,661.8
$106,489.4
$105,521.0
$968.4
$57,063.6
$18.8
$57,001.2
$43.6
$61,639.2
$5,760.9
$55,843.3
$35.0
$54,246.4
$374.2
$52,515.6
$1356.6
$16,810.5
$16,810.5
$11,496.8
$11,461.8
$0.0
$35.0
$7,995.1
$4,613.7
$3381.4
FY1999
Enacted
$346,996.0
$111,978.7
$111,978.7
$0.0
$50,573.7
$18.8
$50,554.9
$0.0
$56,648.8
$7,214.4
$49,434.4
$0.0
$77,286.3
$857.0
$76,429.3
$0.0
$16,390.5
$16390.5
$21,091.7
$20,156.7
$900.0
$35.0
$6,505.5
$3,407.6
$3,097.9
VIII-4
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Science Advisory Board Peer Review $2,586.7 $2 486 7
EPM $2,586.7 $2,486.7
Incorporate Innovative Approaches to Environmental $4,334.1 $4,034.1
Management
$4334.1 $4,034.1
Total Workyears: 1,212.1 1,194.2
Strategic Objective: Research for Ecosystem Assessment
and Restoration
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Research: Clean Water Action Plan-Related Research $0 $1,406
Research: Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program, EMAP $36,262 $33,255
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
RESEARCH: MONITORING DATA FOR ACID DEPOSITION AND UVB
By 1999: Analyze existing monitoring data for acid deposition and UVB and implement a multiple site UVB
monitoring system for measuring status and trends
Performance Measures: Target:
Publish an analysis of the trends in atmospheric deposition and aquatic effects. 30-SEP-99
Baseline: Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently underway.
VHI-5
-------
US. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
RESEARCH: ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT
By 1999: Provide ecological risk assessment case studies for two watersheds, final guidelines for reporting
ecological risk assessment and ecological risk assessment guidance and support.
Performance Measures: Target:
Ecological risk assessment guidelines follow-on project report. 30-SEP-99
Report to CENR on use of Ecological Risk Assessment in the Federal Government. 30-SEP-99
Development and use of ecological information management system. 30-SEP-99
Baseline: Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently underway.
RESEARCH: ECOLOGICAL MONITORING SYSTEM FOR THE MID-ATLANTIC REGION
By 2001: Complete and evaluate a multi-tiered ecological monitoring system for the Mid-Atlantic region and
provide select land cover and aquatic indicators for measuring status and trends.
Performance Measures: Target:
Provide baseline landscape indicators for the Mid-Atlantic Region. 30-SEP-99
Reports on benthic and water quality indicators of condition in estuaries. 30-SEP-99
Publish and analysis of the trends in atmospheric deposition and aquatic effects. 30-SEP-99
Publish Mid-Atlantic region stressor profiles for ozone, acid deposition, pesticides, nitrogen 30-SEP-99
and other stressors.
Baseline: Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently underway.
VIII-6
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ^ 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Research for Human Health Risk
Assessment
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Research: Human Health Research $57,001 $50,324
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
RESEARCH: PESTICIDE EXPOSURE
By 1999: Produce First Generation Exposure-Models Describing Residential Exposure to Pesticides
Performance Measures: Target:
First Generation Residential Exposure Models 30-SEP-99
Baseline: Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently underway.
RESEARCH: SUSCEPTIBILITIES TO EWTOONMENTAL AGENTS
By 2008: Develop and verify innovative methods and models for assessing the susceptibilities of populations
to environmental agents, aimed at enhancing risk assessment and management strategies and guidelines.
Performance Measures: Target:
In 1999 award up to 10 peer reviewed STAR research grants that support studies to 30-SEP-99
quantify the exposure of children to organophosphates, trazines and pyrethroids.
Baseline: Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently underway.
Vffl-7
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Research to Detect Emerging Risk
Issues
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Research: Endocrine Disrupter Research $13,469 $12,230
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
RESEARCH: CHILDREN'S EXPOSURE TO ENDOCRINE DISRUPTING CHEMICALS
By 1999: Initiate Field Exposure Study of Children to 2 EDC's
Performance Measures: Target:
Protocol for field exposure study of children to 2 EDC's " 30-SEP-99
Baseline: Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently underway.
Vffl-8
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ;ppp f/wa/ Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Pollution Prevention and New Technology
for Environmental Protections
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Research: Common Sense Initiative $871 $867
Research: Advanced Measurement Initiative (AMI) $4,000 $0
Research: Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) $7,884 $6,991
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
RESEARCH: FINE PARTICULATE MODEL
By 1999: Improve Computational Efficiency of Fine Particulate Model by 25%.
Performance Measures: Target:
Complete parallel algorithms for aerosol dynamics. 30-SEP-99
Baseline: Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently underway.
Strategic Objective: Increase Use of Integrated, Holistic,
Partnership Approaches
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Sustainable Development Challenge Grants* $° $4>702
*M FY 1999 President's Budget assigned to Goal 1
Regional Geographic Program $12,045 $8,673
vm-9
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Increase Opportunities for Sector Based
Approaches
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Project XL $3,360 $3,360
Common Sense Initiative $3,813 $3,813
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
RESEARCH: PROJECT XL
By 1999: A total of 50 Project XL projects will be in development or implementation, an increase of 23 over
1998.
Performance Measures: Target:
Number of Project XL projects in implementation. 50 Projects
Baseline: Development of "formal" baseline information for EPA research is currently underway.
Strategic Objective: Regional Enhancement of Ability to
Quantify Environmental Outcomes Key Programs
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Regional Science and Technology $7,995 $6,407
vni-io
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 7PPP Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Incorporate Innovative Approaches to Environmental
Management
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Reinvention Programs, Development and Coordination $4,334 $4,334
vm-n
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
EXTERNAL FACTORS
Sound science is predicated on the desire of
the Agency to make human health and
environmental decisions based on sound
scientific data and information. It challenges
the Agency to apply the best available science
and technical analysis when addressing health
and environmental problems that adversely
impact the United States. Such a challenge
moves the Agency to a more integrated,
efficient, and effective approach of reducing
risks to both human health and the
environment. As long as sound science is a
central tenant for actions taken by the Agency,
then external factors will have a minimal
impact on the goal.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
PA has several strategies to validate and verify
'performance measures in the area of
environmental science and technology research.
Most performance measures are verifiable through
quantitative means. For those measures that are
output-oriented, actual outputs or products can be
objectively verified. Because the major output of
research is technical information, primarily in the
form of reports, software, protocols, etc., key to the
validation and verification strategies is the
performance of both peer and quality assurance
reviews.
Scientific research plans, products, and
proposals all are scrutinized by independent entities,
such as the Science Advisory Board (SAB). EPA's
Board of Scientific Councilors (BOSC), established
under the Federal Advisory Committee Act,
evaluates the effectiveness and efficiency of each
Laboratory and Center within the Office of
Research and Development, including areas such as
peer reviews.
Peer reviews provide assurance during the
pre-planning, planning, and reporting of
environmental science and research activities that
the work meets peer expectations. Only those
science activities and resulting information products
that pass Agency peer review are addressed and
published. This applies to program-level, project-
level, and research outputs.
The quality of the peer review activity is
monitored by EPA to ensure that peer reviews are
performed consistently, according to Agency policy,
and that any identified areas of concern are resolved
through discussion or the implementation of
corrective action.
A quality assurance system is implemented at
all levels in the EPA research organization. The
Agency-wide quality assurance system is a
management system that provides the necessary
elements to plan, implement, document, and assess
the effectiveness of quality assurance and quality
control activities applied to environmental programs
conducted by or for EPA.
This quality management system provides for
identification of environmental programs for which
Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) is
needed, specification of the quality of the data
required from environmental programs, and
provision of sufficient resources to assure that an
adequate level of QA/QC is performed.
Performance within the Office of Policy will be
verified by identifying customer usage of economic
VIII-12
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
resources within the Office of Policy, and by satisfaction with economics information available
surveying customers to determine adequacy and and provided.
vm-is
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Fina I Annual Plan
Strategic Cook A Credible Deterrent to Pollution
and Greater Compliance with the Law
EPA will ensure Ml compliance with the laws intended to protect human health and the environment.
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
Protecting the public and the environment from
risks posed by violations of environmental
requirements is, and always has been, basic to
EPA's mission. Many of America's environmental
improvements over the last 25 years are
attributable to a strong set of environmental laws
and an expectation of compliance with those laws.
EPA's strong and aggressive enforcement program
has been the centerpiece of efforts to ensure
compliance, and has achieved significant
improvements in human health and the
environment.
MEANS AND STRATEGY
Many of the environmental improvements in
this country during the past three decades can
be attributed to a strong set of environmental laws
and EPA's aggressive enforcement of them. Due to
the breadth and diversity of private, public, and
federal faculties regulated by EPA under various
statutes, the Agency needs to target its enforcement
and compliance assurance activities strategically to
address the most significant risks to human health
and the environment and to ensure that certain
populations do not bear a disproportionate
environmental burden.
A strong enforcement program identifies
noncompliance problems, punishes violators, strives
to secure a level economic playing field for
law-abiding companies, and deters future violations.
EPA's continued enforcement efforts will be
strengthened through the development of measures
to assess the impact of enforcement activities and
assist in targeting high priority areas.
State, Tribal and local governments bear much
of the responsibility for ensuring compliance, and
EPA works in partnership with them and other
Federal agencies to promote environmental
protection. Further, EPA cooperates with other
nations to enforce and ensure compliance with
international agreements affecting the environment.
At the Federal level, EPA addresses its
responsibilities under the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) by seeking remedies for
potentially adverse impacts of major actions taken
by EPA and other Federal agencies.
IX-1
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Fina I Annual Plan
The Agency's enforcement and compliance
assurance program uses compliance assistance and
incentives tools to enhance voluntary compliance
with regulatory requirements and reduce adverse
public health and environmental problems.
Because government resources are limited,
maximum compliance requires the active efforts of
the regulated community to police itself. EPA
supports the regulated community by assuring that
requirements are clearly understood and by helping
industry find cost-effective options to comply
through the use of pollution prevention and
innovative technology.
encouraging self-directed audits and disclosure;
measuring and evaluating the effectiveness of
Agency programs in improving compliance rates;
providing information and compliance assistance to
the regulated community; and developing innovative
approaches to meeting environmental standards
through better communication, cooperative
approaches and application of new technologies.
EPA will continue to explore options for:
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
1983 La Paz Agreement on US/Mexico Border Region
Clean Air Act sections 113,114, and 303 (42 U.S.C. 7413,7414,7603)
Clean Water Act (CWA) sections 308,309, and 311 (33 U.S.C. 1318,1319,1321)
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act sections 106,107,109,
and 122 (42 U.S.C. 9606,9607,9609,9622)
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act sections 325 and 326 (42 U.S.C. 11045,
11046)
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act sections 8, 9,12, 13, and 14 (7 U.S.C. 136f,
136g, 136j, 136k, 1361)
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation
Ocean Dumping Act sections 101,104B, 105, and 107 (33 U.S.C. 1411,1414B, 1415,1417)
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act sections 3007,3008,3013, and 7003 (42 U.S.C. 6927,
6928, 6934,6973)
Safe Drinking Water Act section 1413,1414,1417,1422,1423,1425,1431,1432,1445 (42 U.S.C.
300g-2,300g-3,300g-6,300h-l, 300h-2,300h-4,300i, 300i-l, 300J-4)
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) sections 11,16, and 17 and TSCA Titles II and IV (15
U.S.C. 2610,2615,2616,2641-2656,2681-2692)
LX-2
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Fina I Annual Plan
Resource Summary
(Dollars in thousands)
A Credible Deterrent to Pollution and Greater Compliance with
the Law
Enforcement Tools to Reduce Non-Compliance
EPM
S&T
STAG
SF
Increase Use of Auditing, Self-Policing Policies
EPM
S&T
STAG
SF
Total Workyears:
FY1999
Pres. Budget
$332,733.8
$283,209.4
$190,770.5
$8,662.8
$67,079.3
$16,696.8
$49,524.4
$45,700.3
$97.9
$3333.4
$392.8
2,559.3
FY1999
Enacted
$319^90.3
$272,965.9
$181,844.0
$8,583.9
$67,884.4
$14,653.6
$46,424.4
$43,940.3
$0.0
$2,214.2
$269.9
2,554.4
IX-3
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Fina I Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Enforcement Tools to Reduce Non-
Compliance
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
RCRA State Grants
Compliance Monitoring
Civil Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement
Compliance Assistance and Centers
Enforcement Training
State Pesticides Enforcement Grants
State Toxics Enforcement Grants
$43,537
$65,015
$86,821
$35,412
$0
$5,086
$18,392
$5,150
$43,223
$56,839
$83,090
$33,787
$37
$4,436
$19,512
$5,150
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
INCREASE COMPLIANCE
By 1999: Deter non-compliance by maintaining levels of field presence and enforcement actions, particularly in
high risk areas and/or where populations are disproportionately exposed. In 1999, EPA will conduct 15,000
inspections and undertake 2,600 enforcement actions.
Performance Measures: Target:
EPA Inspections 15,000 Inspections
Baseline: The number of inspections conducted annually has remained fairly consistent in recent years. This
information is the basis for the 1999 projections, with adjustments made for changes in resources levels, hi
1999, the enforcement program will target 50% of its inspections to priority areas. These areas will be
identified in an internal guidance document which sets forth specific priorities for 1999 and forms the basis for
this calculation.
IX-4
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 pina iAnnuai p/an
TARGET HIGH PRIORITY AREAS
By 1999: Target high priority areas for enforcement and compliance assistance and complete baseline data
assessment in major databases needed to measure quality of key indicators of compliance. The Agency will
identify five high priority areas and improve 2 of their data systems.
Performance Measures: Target:
Data system improve. To capture chgs to 98 base 2 Data Systems
Baseline: No baseline established for FY 1999.
ASSIST STATES AND TRIBES
By 1999: Assist states and tribes with their enforcement and compliance assurance and incentive programs.
EPA will provide specialized assistance and training, including 83 courses, to state and tribal officials to
enhance the effectiveness of their programs.
Performance Measures: Target:
Specialized Asst. & Training 83 Courses
Baseline: 89 training sessions in FY 97.
IX-5
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ' 1999 Fina I Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Increase Use of Auditing, Self-Policing
Policies
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Project XL
Common Sense Initiative
Compliance Assistance and Centers
Compliance Incentives
NEPA Implementation
State Pesticides Enforcement Grants
State Toxics Enforcement Grants
$2,912
$1,086
$24,376
$4,203
$9,521
$1,119
$2,214
$2,905
$1,083
$23,178
$4,076
$9,402
$1,119
$0
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
COMPLIANCE INCENTIVES
By 1999: Increase regulated community's use of compliance incentives and their understanding of, and ability
to comply with, regulatory requirements. The Agency will cant, to operate 9 small business compl. asst.
centers and will complete sector notebooks, guides, and other outreach materials begun in FY98.
Performance Measures: Target:
Compl. Assistance Centers in Oper. 9 Centers
Compliance Tools Development 5 Sector Guides
Fed Fac Mgt Reviews 15 Reviews
Baseline: The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program collects information from the regions
annually on how many faculties are being reached through compliance assistance efforts. In 1997, EPA
conducted 98,830 activities across all sectors & statutes & reached 342,310 faculties. The number of
compliance assistance tools developed in 1997 was 1,190.
IX-6
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Fina I Annual Plan
EXTERNAL FACTORS
EPA's enforcement program's ability to meet its
annual performance goals may be affected by a
number of factors. Projected performance would be
impacted by natural catastrophes, such as major
floods or significant chemical spills, that require a
redirection of enforcement resources to address
immediate environmental threats.
Many of the targets are predicated on the
assumption that state and tribal partners will
continue or increase their levels of enforcement and
compliance work.
If these assumptions do not come to fruition,
EPA's resources may be needed to cover priority
areas. In addition, several EPA targets rely on the
Department of Justice (DOT) to accept and execute
case loads. The success of EPA's activities hinge on
the availability and applicability of technology and
information systems.
Finally, the regulated community's willingness
to make decisions to comply with the law will
greatly influence EPA's ability to meet its
performance goals.
Other factors such as the number of projects
subject to scoping requirements initiated by other
federal agencies, the number of draft/final
documents (Environmental Assessments and
Environmental Impact Statements) submitted to
EPA for review, streamlining requirements of
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
(TEA-21), and the responsiveness of other federal
agencies to environmental concerns raised by EPA
may also impact the Agency's ability to meet its
performance goals.
The Agency's ability to address issues under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) may be
significantly affected by the number of project
proposals submitted to EPA for funding or permits
that require NEPA compliance.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
'~P'he following are databases that contain baseline
JL performance information and their sources for
the enforcement and compliance assurance
program:
(1) National Compliance Data Base (NCDB) /
FffRA/TSCA Tracking system (FTTS) - EPA
Headquarters (HQ), EPA regions, and states.
(2) DOCKET - EPA HQ and regions
(3) Permit Compliance System (PCS) - EPA regions
and states
(4) FIFRA Section Seven Tracking System (SSTS)
- EPA regions
(5) FTFRA Laboratory Inspection Study Audit
(LISA) - EPA HQ and regions
(6) Pesticide Registration Enforcement System
(PRES)-EPAHQ
(7) Waste Import Tracking System (WITS) - EPA
regions
(8) CERCLIS - EPA regions
(9) Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis
(IDEA) - EPA compliance and enforcement data
bases and external data sources
(10) Resource Conservation and Recovery
Information System (RCRIS) - EPA regions and
states
(11) Safe Drinking Water Information System
(SDWIS) - EPA regions and states
(12) AIRS Air Facility Subsystem (AFS) - EPA
regions and states and locals
IX-7
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Fina I Annual Plan
(13) Asbestos Contractor Tracking System (ACTS)/
National Asbestos Registry System (NARS) - EPA
regions and states
(14) Docket - EPA HQ and regions
(15) Environmental Review Tracking System
(ERTS) - EPA regions and other Federal agencies.
While specific data entry/QC practices may
vary by individual system, each system has been
developed in accordance with Office of Information
Resources Management (OIRM) Lifecycle
Management Guidance. The systems incorporate
data validation processes and include internal screen
audit checks and verification, detailed system and
user documentation, data quality audit reports, third
party testing reports and detailed report
specifications for showing how report data are
calculated. EPA is also developing and
implementing detailed system specific Quality
Management Plans for all its systems. These plans
will include development of Data Quality
Objectives, Quality Assurance Project Plans and
Standard Operating Procedures. The enforcement
program conducted data evaluation and implement
improved processes during 1998 and 1999 for
enforcement data related to anticipated
environmental outcomes.
Continuous and accurate data entry to the
national data systems is crucial to EPA's ability to
assess compliance with environmental laws and
regulations. Questions have been raised internally
and externally about the quality and completeness
of the data in the systems as well as the ability of
our existing systems to meet our data needs.
Differences in the definitions of noncompliance
applied by state agencies and/or state failure to
report to EPA in a timely and comprehensive
fashion affect EPA's ability to determine compliance
patterns across the national program. However,
many state and EPA staff have noted difficulty in
using the systems and that the data are not useful for
program implementation. Some of the data
limitations reflect systems problems - for example,
enforcement systems are on multiple platforms and
use different software, many of which are
technologically obsolete and difficult to use.
Further, the incompatible database structures and
designs make effective multi-media analysis
extremely difficult and provide questionable results.
Differences in data definitions within each system
make it difficult to link facility data for all media
programs.
With significant state participation, EPA is
working on several projects to obtain more
comprehensive and accurate compliance information
for the universe of regulated entities:
The National Performance Measures Strategy,
intended to identify and implement an enhanced
set of performance measures for EPA's
enforcement and compliance program, will
provide new, more detailed information on
levels of compliance in regulated populations
and enhanced data on environmental and public
health improvements from enforcement efforts.
For five key industrial sectors, the Sector
Facilities Indexing Project (SFIP) provides
environmental and background data, including
numbers of inspections, compliance with
Federal regulations, enforcement actions taken,
chemical releases and spills, location and
production capacity, and surrounding
population.
Other sector-based initiatives implemented in
partnership with industry, including root cause
analyses projects, are designed to provide more
detailed accounts of inspection and enforcement
activity over time, violations by media and by
specific pollutants released, and the causes of
these violations.
The Enforcement and Compliance Information
(ECI) program, a long-range initiative to re-
engineer EPA's approach to integrated
information, is intended to improve data quality
and its uses and to improve public access and
understanding of enforcement and compliance
data.
TX-8
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Fina I Annual Plan
The Quality Management Plan (QMP) project
will establish system specific data quality
objectives which specify how data will be used
and limits on decision errors. QMP's will
involve developing quality assurance project
plans to document how quality assurance and
quality control activities will be implemented,
setting standard operating procedures for
assessing data quality; and conducting quality
reviews to assess progress in meeting our goals.
QMPs are underway for the NCDB and RCRIS
systems and were completed in 1999 for PCS,
AIRS and DOCKET.
The enforcement program will also undertake
modernization design and will complete the concept
and design phase of the General Enforcement
Management System.
A number of external reports and internal
reviews have described problems in the quality of
EPA's data quality and analysis of enforcement and
compliance information. A data quality survey,
widely distributed within EPA Headquarters and
Regions and to nine states, solicited respondents'
views on the nature and extent of enforcement and
compliance data problems. A subsequent Strategic
and Tactical Automation Plan, developed to address
these problems and criticisms, supports the
Environmental Compliance Initiative and other data
management improvements. Regional reviews of
data quality of enforcement and compliance
information will continue in 1999.
The Sector Facility Indexing Project produced
a data quality findings document for AFS, PCS and
RCRIS which offers specific guidance for use in
QA/QC procedures.
Information on the application of the self-
policing policy, as well as targeted assistance, is
tracked manually. The enforcement and compliance
assurance program will complete the assessment of
recording and producing information on the self-
policing policy in DOCKET.
The enforcement program publishes Federal
Register Notices for all Environmental Impact
Statements (EISs) received by EPA. EPA regions
review and comment on all EISs.
The EPA Inspector General in 1997 addressed
problems states have identifying and reporting of
Clean Air Act significant violators, which have
impaired EPA's ability to evaluate the levels of
noncompliance in that program. As follow up, the
enforcement and compliance assurance program is
preparing trend analyses using information in the
AFS to identify states most likely to have problems.
In 1997 the enforcement and compliance
assurance program also assessed its 1996 targeted
compliance assistance data and developed a series of
recommended improvements. The program
implemented several improvements in 1997 and
1998 to manually track compliance assistance data.
The program continues to assess the suitability of
tracking targeted compliance assistance in the
national database systems.
IX-9
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Goal: Effective Management
EPA will establish a management infrastructure that will set and implement the highest quality standards
for effective internal management and fiscal responsibility.
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
fforts under this goal support the full range of
J /Agency activities for a healthy and sustainable
environment. To advance the protection of
human health and the environment, effective vision
and leadership, sound management practices,
results-based planning and budgeting, fiscal
accountability, quality customer service, rational
policy guidance and careful stewardship of our
resources form the foundation for everything EPA
does.
The effectiveness of EPA's management will
determine, in large measure, how successful we
progress towards the goals identified in the
Agency's annual plan and the long-term goals in the
strategic plan. Agency management systems and
processes will be supported by independent
evaluations that promote efficient and effective
programs, so that we can obtain the greatest return
on taxpayer investment.
MEANS AND STRATEGY
'T'he Agency will provide vision and leadership as
-L well as executive direction and policy oversight
for all EPA programs. In keeping with its
commitment to protect children's health, the Agency
will target resources towards EPA's many diverse
children's activities. The Agency will provide policy
direction and guidance on equal employment
opportunity and civil rights. The Agency's
Administrative Law Judges and its Environmental
Appeals Board Judges will issue decisions on
administrative complaints and environmental
adjudications, respectively, in a timely manner.
The Agency will provide the management
services, administrative support and operations to
enable the Agency to achieve its environmental
mission and to meet its fiduciary and workforce
responsibilities. We will manage an integrated
planning, budgeting, analysis, financial management
and accountability process to ensure effective
stewardship of resources which meets
statutory requirements of GPRA, CFO, and related
legislation.
In 1999, the Agency will design an
accountability system that captures all key
performance measures, and begin to develop a cost
accounting system to enable Agency managers and
stakeholders to know the full cost of Agency
programs and the resources associated with
achievement of environmental results. The strategy
for ensuring sound management of administrative
services will be accomplished by managing
information systems effectively, ensuring a high
level of integrity and accountability in the
management of grants and contracts, and investing
in our human resources to ensure that the Agency's
workforce is of the highest caliber and is fully
prepared to deliver national leadership and expertise
in environmental protection.
The Agency will provide a quality work
environment that considers employee safety and
security, building operations, utilities, facilities, new
construction, repairs and pollution prevention,
X-l
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
within Headquarters and nationwide. Plans for
building operations and new construction supports
existing infrastructure requirements that ensure
healthy, safe and secure work environments that
reflect the pollution prevention values of EPA and
helps fulfill the scientific and functional
requirements of our programs. In FY1999, EPA
will make significant progress in completing the
consolidated new Headquarters,
as well as the consolidated
research lab at Research
Triangle Park in North Carolina.
audits and investigations to reduce the risk of fraud
and other improprieties. We will also increase
assistance services to the Agency to help resolve
significant management problems and achieve
maximum efficiency and effectiveness. These
strategies will assist the Agency in accomplishing its
mission and improve the performance and integrity
of its programs and operations.
The Agency will provide
audit and investigative products
and services, all of which can
facilitate the accomplishment of
the Agency's mission. The
Agency will conduct
performance audit work with a
focus on environmental results,
and assist the Agency in
implementing performance
evaluation to promote full
compliance with GPRA. We will
continue emphasizing contract
and assistance agreement audits
and investigations to ensure
integrity in the application of
Agency resources. For example,
15 construction grant closeout
audits are scheduled to be
conducted in 1999. We plan to
increase collaboration between
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
Administrative Procedure Act
Annual Appropriations Act
Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VH
Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VI
Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, 41 CFR and D.C. Recycling Act of
1998
Clinger-Cohen Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act
Computer Security Act
Electronic Freedom of Information Act
EPA's Environmental Statues, and the Federal Grant and Cooperative
Agreement Act
Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), contract law, and EPA's
Assistance Regulations (40CFR Parts 30,31,35,40,45,46,47)
Federal Manager's Financial Integrity Act (1982)
Federal Property and Administrations Service Act
Freedom of Information Act
Government Management Reform Act (1994)
Inspector General Act of 1978
Inspector General Act Amendments of 1988
Paperwork Reduction Act
Privacy Act
Public Buildings Act
The Chief Financial Officers Act (1990)
The Government Performance and Results Act (1993)
The Prompt Payment Act (1982)
Title 5 United States Code.
X-2
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Resource Summary
(Dollars in thousands)
Effective Management
Executive Leadership
EPM
SF
Management Services, Administrative, and Stewardship
EPM
S&T
LUST
OIL
IG
SF
Building Operations, Utilities and New Construction
EPM
B&F
LUST
OIL
IG
SF
Provide Audit and Investigative Products and Services
EPM
IG
SF
Total Workyears:
FY1999
Pres. Budget
$659,8605
$30,895.9
$30,806.5
$89.4
$234,293.9
$173,112.3
$226.0
$1,047.6
$3.3
$72.1
$59,832.6
$354,753.9
$238,022.3
$52,948.0
$1,033.6
$537.8
$2,537.9
$59,674.3
$39,916.8
$619.7
$28,544.0
$10,753.1
2,974.7
FY1999
Enacted
$645,174.0
$31,112.6
$31,023 2
$89.4
$220,806.1
$162,828.9
$326.0
$1,047.7
$3.3
$72.1
$56,528.1
$353,366.1
$233,245.5
$56,948.0
$1,033.6
$537.8
$4,021.9
$57,579.3
$39,889.2
$592.2
$39,297.0
$0.0
2,991.2
X-3
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Executive Leadership
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
EMPACT
Civil Rights/Title VI Compliance
Immediate Office of the Administrator
Administrative Law
Children's Health, Program Development and Coordination
$1,000
$1,312
$3,691
$2,124
$5,716
$81
$1,637
$2,791
$2,324
$6,158
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
CHILDREN'S HEALTH
By 1999: By the end of 1999, evaluate 5 EPA standards to ensure they are protective of children's health.
Performance Measures: Target:
Re-evaluate standards to ensure they consider children's special health needs <5 standards
Baseline: Baseline will be established in 2000.
X-4
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Management Services, Administrative, and
Stewardship
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Human Resources Management
Contracts Management
Grants Management
Information Technology Management
Reinventing Environmental Information (RET)
Environmental Finance Center Grants (EFC)
Planning and Resources Management
Regional Management
$22,297
$27,674
$9,680
$24,978
$2,500
$940
$73,627
$41,046
$21,932
$24,986
$8,569
$21,975
$2,507
$1,065
$69,120
$42,535
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
GPRA IMPLEMENTATION
By 1999: By the end of 1999, the Agency can plan and track performance against annual goals and capture
100% of costs ihrough the new PBAA structure, based on modified budget and financial accounting systems, a
new accountability process and new cost accounting mechanisms.
Performance Measures: Target:
The Accountability System tracks accomplishments against annual performance goals and 9/30/99
measures and provides the information necessary for evaluating and adjusting program
activities.
Baseline: OCFO's Congressional/Vital Few Annual Performance Goal and Measures reflect top mission
priorities that will be achieved in FY 1999.
PERFORMANCE-BASED CONTRACTING
By 1999: EPA will improve the quality, effectiveness and efficiency of EPA's acquisition and Contract
management process by completing 10% of contracts utilizing performance-based statement of works.
X-5
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Performance Measures: Target:
Percentage of contracts utilizing performance-based statements of work. 10 Percent
Baseline: Baseline is 10% in 1999,5% in 1998, and 0% in 1997.
Y2K COMPLIANCE
By 1999: All mission critical systems will continue to support core Agency functions without interruption
across Year 2000 date change.
Performance Measures: Target:
Percentage of mission-critical systems functioning in accordance with Y2K requirement 100 Percent
Baseline: In 1999, all 58 mission critical systems are operating properly and are functioning in accordance
with Y2K requirements.
X-6
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Strategic Objective: Building Operations, Utilities and New
Construction
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
New Construction: New Headquarters Project
New Construction: RTF New Building Project
Facility Operations: Repairs and Improvements
Facility Operations: Security
Facility Operations: Agency Rental/ Direct Lease
Facility Operations: Agency Utilities
Regional Program Infrastructure
$15,945
$32,000
$15,428
$12,962
$170,572
$10,715
$67,143
$15,945
$36,000
$15,428
$12,962
$170,572
$10,015
$66,532
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
NEW HQ CONSOLIDATION
By 1999: Continue renovation of the new consolidated headquarters complex completing 100% buildout of the
Ariel Rios north and Wilson building and 50% of the base buildout of the Interstate Commerce Commission
building. Move 38% of EPA personnel from vacated spaces to the new consolidated complex.
Performance Measures: Target:
Percentage of the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC)/Customs building completed. 50 Percent
Percentage of EPA personnel consolidated into Headquarters complex. 38 Percent
Complete buildout of Ariel Rios Building 100 Percent
Baseline: In 1999, RTF construction baseline is 50% completion, the Interstate Commerce
Commission baseline is 50% completion, and 100% completion of FT. Mead Lab construction.
Also, 38% of EPA personnel will be consolidated into the new HQ complex.
X-7
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
RTF CONSTRUCTION
By 1999: Complete at least 50% of construction of the consolidated research lab at Research Triangle Park
North Carolina.
Performance Measures: Target:
Percent of new RTF building construction completed. 50 Percent
Baseline: Complete 22% of construction at RTP.
Strategic Objective: Provide Audit and Investigative Products
and Services
Key Programs
(Dollars in thousands)
1999 Pres Bud 1999 Enacted
Contract Audits
Assistance Agreement Audits
Program Audits
Financial Statement Audits
Program Integrity Investigations
Assistance Agreement Investigations
Contract and Procurement Investigations
Employee Integrity Investigations
$4,951
$6,831
$10,264
$4,188
$912
$2,650
$2,913
$953
$4,951
$6,831
$10,264
$4,188
$912
$2,650
$2,913
$953
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
PROVIDE OBJECTIVE, TIMELY, AND INDEPENDENT AUDITING, CONSULTING, AND
INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES
In 1999: The OIG will provide objective, timely, and independent auditing, consulting, and
investigative services through such actions as completing 15 construction grant closeout audits.
X-8
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1999 Final Annual Plan
Performance Measures: Target:
Monetary value of recommendations, questioned costs, savings, and recoveries. $ 118.5 M
Monetary value of fines, judgements, settlements, restitutions, and savings $4.16 M
IG recommendations made to improve the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of 57 Recom/Action
operations and environmental programs.
Judicial, Administration and other actions taken to enforce law, reduce or avoid risk. Actions
Construction Grants Closeout Audits 15 Audits
Baseline: The Office of Investigations will use $ 4.24 million as their performance baseline for monetary
value of fines, judgements, settlements, restitutions, and savings, for judicial, administrative, and other actions
taken to enforce law, reduce or avoid risk, 53 judicial and administrative actions will be the performance
baseline, 68.9 assistance agreements and contracts opened will be the baseline, percentage of cases completed
resulting in referrals will have a baseline of 37.1% and percentage of cases completed or referred within one
year initiation will be 52%.
X-9
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
EXTERNAL FACTORS
New legislation that would impose major new
requirements necessitating a shift in existing
priorities absent any commensurate increase in
resources in areas such as strategic planning,
performance measurement, and/or resource and
financial management.
New administrative requirements in areas such
as accounting standards and reporting from central
offices such as OMB or Department of Treasury or
other central offices that would impose new
requirements for Agency financial and other
systems.
The ability of the Office of Investigations,
Office of Inspector General, to accomplish its
annual performance goal is dependent, in part, on
external factors. Indictments, convictions, fines,
restitutions, civil recoveries, suspensions, and
debarments are affected by the actions of others
(e.g., the Department of Justice). In addition, the
prosecutive criteria established within various
jurisdictions (e.g., dollar thresholds) can affect the
number of cases.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Office of Children's Health Protection will
evaluate 5 EPA standards to ensure they
consider the special needs of children's health.
Records will be maintained. Agency financial
systems such as IFMS, MARS, EPAYS, and
SCORPIOS will be used in preparing a variety of
financial material and reports as required by the
Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Act, the Government
Management Reform Act (GMRA), the Federal
Financial Managers Integrity Act (FFMIA), and the
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
An accountability system is currently being
designed to manage the data for all key performance
measures to track progress toward annual
performance goals, against which the Agency will
be held accountable to Congress and the public.
The NPMs will be the source of the data in the
accountability system and will be responsible for its
accuracy and quality.
The Agency requires a timely, accurate and
useful data system for program audit follow-up.
The Management Audit Tracking System (MATS)
is such a data system. Through MATS, the Agency
aggressively tracks follow-up on its Office of
Inspector General (OIG) audit findings and
recommendations.
The approach to validate progress in reaching
Agency performance targets will also rely on the
Agency's automated performance measure system to
capture programmatic and customer service
outcomes. The system will require periodic updating
of performance data. Performance information will
be collected and evaluated against targets on a
quarterly basis.
The collection of performance data will involve
a variety of methods, for example customer service
surveys. Customer service surveys will be
conducted annually to measure customer service
satisfaction with management and administrative
services. The results of the customer service survey
will be used to validate performance measures.
The major sources of key performance measure
data for the Office of Audit (OA) are the Inspector
X-10
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
General Operation and Reporting (IGOR) system,
customer surveys, and selected follow up reviews.
The IGOR system is an integrated tracking system
for the OIG and includes a module for OA. The
reports generated by IGOR are used by OA
management to monitor workload assignments, the
cost, timeliness, and efficiency of audit work
products (reports, memorandums, and briefings),
and employee time.
Each Headquarters and divisional staff member
is responsible for data integrity and accuracy. Data
accuracy is subject to reviews by OA management,
an OIG Management Assessment Review team, and
a peer review team from another Federal Office of
Inspector General.
Customer surveys measure the timeliness,
relevancy, usefulness, and responsiveness of our
products and services. Follow up reviews validate
the relevancy and effectiveness of our work and
involvement toward the achievement of
environmental outputs and outcomes. OIG is not
aware of any limitations of performance data.
The major source of key performance measure
data for the Office of Investigations (OI) is also
IGOR. The IGOR system will include a module for
01. The reports generated by this system are used by
OI management to evaluate productivity by tracking
the number of cases opened and closed, personnel
time charges, judicial and administrative actions
(such as indictments, convictions, suspensions, and
debarments, sentencing or personnel actions), and
financial information to include fines, recoveries,
judgments, settlements, restitutions, and savings.
Divisional personnel are responsible for
entering data on personnel time charges and
verifying that these charges are accurately reflected
in the system. An investigative information
specialist in Headquarters monitors data entered by
divisional personnel and enters information on case
openings and closings, judicial and administrative
actions, and financial information. Management
accountability reports are prepared and sent to
Headquarters desk officers and divisional personnel
for review and verification. The accuracy of data in
the system is also subject to independent review by
an OIG Management Assessment Review team.
The primary sources of key performance
measure data within the Program Support Staff are
the EPA Integrated Financial Management System
(IFMS) and the EPA Budget Automation System
(BAS). The IFMS generates the information
necessary to prepare annual operating plans and
monthly status of funds reports which are used by
OIG management to effectively and efficiently use
available resources.
This system provides detailed information on
operating plan projections as well as expenditures
and remaining balances by account and budget
object class. The BAS contains budget development
information which is used by OIG management to
estimate future budget needs and to implement the
requirements of the Government Performance and
Results Act. Data is entered in IFMS and BAS by
both the OIG and Agency personnel who are
responsible for verifying that the information is
accurately reflected. System security is maintained
through the use of passwords. The accuracy of data
in the IFMS and BAS are subject to audit by the
EPA Office of Inspector General and the General
Accounting Office.
X-ll
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
THE CUSTOMER SERVICE PROGRAM
Customer Service Program (CSP) was
X established in 1993, immediately after
President Clinton signed Executive Order
12862, "Setting Customer Service Standards."
The Office of Policy provides staff support,
coordinates an annual conference, and chairs
EPA's Customer Service Steering Committee
(CSSC), the group that sets CSP policy.
By involving approximately 400
individuals from staff and management through
CSSC work groups and office/region/laboratory
Consumer Service councils, the Agency
leverages its two person customer service staff
to implement the Agency's Customer Service
Strategy.
What Improved Customer Service
Will Achieve
EPA published a Customer Service Plan
in September 1995, and in May 1997, officially
adopted critical process standards and a set of
universal principles that apply to the work of
everyone at EPA. These six standards focus on:
helping all EPA employees understand
the importance and substantial mission
related benefits of improving service to
the public;
providing employees with goals and
guidelines for improvement and
involving them in identifying and
attempting to eliminate barriers to
achieving standards;
providing training to build staff capacity
to achieve the standards and effectively
apply customer service skills;
developing measurement and tracking
systems to document service and
product improvements;
learning what we need to do to increase
satisfaction with our services and our
treatment of customers; and recognizing
and rewarding customer service
excellence.
By 2003, all EPA staff will be meeting
the customer service standards that apply to their
work and will have received training necessary
to assist them to achieve the standards. Because
customer feedback and satisfaction measurement
are critical underpinnings to the overall program,
in 1998 the CSP developed "Hearing the Voice
of the Customer - Customer Feedback and
Customer Satisfaction Measurement
Guidelines."
In 1999, CSP will sponsor workshops to
train an advisor/consultant group to assist people
across the Agency to use the guidelines to obtain
and use customer input. All feedback
instruments will be cleared through the OMB
under the CSP generic Information Collection
Request (ICR) for customer satisfaction surveys.
The CSP reports bi-monthly to the
National Partnership for Reinventing
Government and the American people via the
Internet. This initiative, "Conversations with
America," solicits and gathers customers'
comments and ideas for improving EPA's
products and services.
Nearly 200 EPA staff are certified to
facilitate training across the Agency. Many are
involved in delivering both Forging the Links,
an EPA specific service workshop, and customer
skills courses that supplement the workshop.
Through sharing benchmarking/best practices
information and by sponsoring the annual
conference, the CSP supplements training
opportunities. Through recognizing outstanding
service, the Agency highlights, encourages, and
reinforces service excellence.
SA-1
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Expected Results
In support of the Customer Service
Executive Order and various Presidential
memorandums in FY 2000, the Agency will
maintain leadership and coordination of the
National CSP by providing:
policy and guidance development;
communication and liaison with Senior
managers, the National Partnership for
Reinventing Government (NPR), and
other federal and state partners;
best practices research;
conversations with American reporting;
direct and contractual support to the
CSP committees and work groups;
continuous support for guidelines and
measurements;
a third National Customer Service
Conference;
increased access to CSP information via
the Intra and Internet.
EPA's Administrator Carol Browner has
stated that "EPA will be a model for all
regulatory agencies by fully integrating
customer satisfaction measures into our strategic
planning, budgeting and decision making, while
recognizing the diversity of our customers and
the need for balancing competing and
conflicting interests. Above all, we will
strengthen our ability to listen to the voice of our
customers so that we can identify their needs
and act upon them." The Customer Service
Program supports the Administration's
commitment to enhance customer service.
SA-2
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
COST AND BENEFITS OF ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT
RULES IN FY1999 OR FY 2000
GOAL 1: CLEAN AIR
Automobile and Light-Duty Truck
Manufacturing
(Surface
Coating)
NESHAP/VOC Reductions
This action will result in the reduction
of HAPs and VOCs emitted by the automobile
and light-duty truck manufacturing industry.
The major HAPs emitted from surface coating
operations include ethylene glycol monobutyl
ether, methyl ethyl ketone, methyl isobutyl
ketone, toluene, and xylene, among others.
There are approximately 60 automobile
and light-duty truck assembly plants in the U.S.
This project is in the data gathering phase;
thus, quantitative estimates of costs and benefits
are not available at this time.
Industrial
Combustion Coordinated
Rulemaking - ICCR Project
The EPA is developing
combustion-related regulations for five source
categories. The source categories are:
combustion turbines, internal combustion
engines, industrial/commercial/institutional
boilers, process heaters, and solid waste
incinerators burning non-hazardous waste. These
regulations are being developed under Sections
111, 112, and 129 of the CAA. Sections 111 and
129 require maximum achievable control
technology (MACT) floors and MACT levels to
be determined. MACT standards apply to both
new and existing facilities.
Section 111 requires the development of
new source performance standards (NSPS).
These regulations apply to new, modified, and
reconstructed sources and do not apply to
existing sources. These source categories are
widespread and one or more of these source
categories are located at virtually every
manufacturing and chemical plant in the US.
Section 112 standards apply to a list of
189 hazardous air pollutants (HAPs); Section
129 standards apply to 9 pollutants (dioxin and
furans, mercury, cadmium, lead, paniculate
matter and opacity, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen
chloride, oxides of nitrogen, and carbon
monoxide) which are a combination of HAP's
and criteria pollutants; and Section 111 applies
to criteria pollutants. There is likely to be some
regulatory interaction between these source
categories since many are collocated at the same
plant site.
Therefore, EPA is undertaking a
coordinated rulemaking with early and
continuing stakeholder participation, including
participation by small entity representatives. A
coordinated participatory rulemaking offers
benefits to all stakeholders including: the
opportunity for stakeholders to shape regulatory
development, more cost-effective regulations,
avoidance of duplicative or conflicting
regulations, simpler regulations, compliance
flexibility, EPA and stakeholder resource
savings in rule development, and an improved
scientific basis for regulations.
The benefits and costs resulting from the
ICCR are not known at this time. Control
Technologies and their efficiencies and costs are
still being investigated. More should be known
in early to mid 1999. It is expected that the costs
and benefits could be large due to the fact that
there are potentially hundreds of thousands of
affected facilities located at almost all types of
industrial facilities.
SA-3
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
NESHAP: Integrated Iron and Steel
The Clean Air Act, as amended
November 1990, requires the EPA to regulate
categories of major and area sources of
hazardous air pollutants (HAP). The EPA has
determined that integrated iron and steel mills
emit several of the 189 HAP listed (including
compounds of chromium, lead, manganese,
toluene, and polycyclic organic matter) in
quantities sufficient to designate them as major
sources.
As a consequence, integrated iron and
steel facilities are among the HAP-emitting
source categories selected for regulation. The
integrated iron & steel NESHAP will
significantly reduce hazardous air pollutant
metals and particulate emissions from these
sources. The cost and benefits analysis for this
NESHAP has not been completed, as a result
this rule may not constitute an economically
significant (major) rule under E.O. 12866.. This
analysis should be completed in October 1999.
Control of Air Pollution from Marine Diesel
Engines Rulemaking
This rulemaking will serve to reduce
harmful emissions from marine diesel engines
rated over 37 kW. The measurable benefit of
the regulation will be an approximately 35
percent reduction in emissions of oxides of
nitrogen and particulate matter from these
engines. The costs of the rulemaking will be
borne by the manufacturers of marine diesel
engines and will likely be passed on in part to
their customers in the form of higher prices.
No direct costs will be borne by any
government or household. Total estimated costs
to society range from $40 million to $110
million per year (in 1998 dollars). A net present
value over 20 years is calculated to be
approximately $700 million when discounted at
7 percent. Monetized benefits estimates for this
rulemaking are not yet available.
Heavy-duty _
Rulemaking
Gasoline Engines/Vehicles
EPA proposed NOX plus NMHC
standards for 2004 and later model year heavy-
duty diesel and Otto-cycle (e.g. spark ignition /
gasoline-fueled) engines. EPA finalized the
standards for diesel engines (62 FR 54694,
October 21, 1997) but did not finalize the
standards for Otto-cycle engines. In a
Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
EPA will be proposing new HD Otto-cycle
engine and vehicle standards.
Currently, EPA has a vehicle program
for vehicles up to 8,500 pounds gross vehicle
weight (GVWR) and an engine-based program
for engines used in vehicles with GVWRs above
8,500 pounds. EPA plans to propose to move
complete HD vehicles (about 70 percent of HD
gasoline engines) into the vehicle program.
Examples of vehicles included in this category
are large full size pickup, the largest sport utility
vehicles, and full size cargo and commercial
passenger vans.
EPA will also be proposing engine-
based standards 'for engines used in vehicles not
covered by the vehicle program. The new
standards would reduce emissions of oxides of
nitrogen and hydrocarbons from these engines
by about 75 percent from current levels
beginning with the 2004 model year. Cost and
benefits estimates are not yet available for this
rule, however, EPA anticipates that it will be an
economically significant (major) rule under E.O.
12866.
The Tier n rulemaking will be a
significant rulemaking under the definitions in
Executive Order 12866. This rulemaking will
propose the next generation of emission
standards for light-duty vehicles and light-duty
trucks. The primary focus of this action will be
SA-4
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
reducing emissions of nitrogen oxides and non-
methane hydrocarbons, pollutants which
contribute to ozone pollution. Highway vehicles
are significant contributors to ozone pollution,
though tighter standards will also have
additional air quality benefits. These standards
cannot go into effect before the 2004 model
year, as per Clean Air Act requirements.
EPA is also planning on addressing
more stringent standards for heavy-duty gasoline
engines, effective no earlier than model year
2007, in this rulemaking since many of the
technologies used to achieve better emissions
performance of light-duty trucks could also be
used to reduce emissions from heavy-duty
gasoline engines. The rulemaking will also
propose limitations on the sulfur content of
gasoline. Sulfur has a detrimental impact on
catalyst performance and could be a limiting
factor in the introduction of advanced
technologies on motor vehicles.
There are also additional air quality
benefits, such as paniculate matter and sulfate
reductions, associated with reducing sulfur
levels in gasoline. This rulemaking is in a very
early stage of development, and related cost and
benefit estimates are not yet available.
Therefore, it may not constitute an economically
significant (major) rule under E.G. 12866
GOAL 2: CLEAN AND SAFE WATER
NPDES Storm Water Phase n Rule
The proposed NPDES storm water
phase n rule establishes a permitting program to
regulate contaminated storm water discharges
from small municipal separate storm sewer
systems in urbanized areas and small
construction sites (between one and five acres).
There are some waivers built into the draft rule,
reducing or eliminating application requirements
where there is little or no environmental impact.
For the rulemaking components that
have been proposed, the Agency estimated total
annual costs ranging from $141 million to $880
million (1997 dollars). Benefits associated with
the proposed rule include improvements to water
quality and reduced human health risks.
Estimated annual monetized benefits associated
with financial, recreational, and health related
improvements ranged from $175 million to $573
million (1997 dollars) annually.
The Agency has identified additional
benefit categories that it was unable to monetize
and thus are not included in these estimates.
The Agency received a wide range of comments
through various public forums and expects that
revisions will be made to these estimates. EPA
plans to finalize this rule in October 1999.
Proposed Regulation Governing Cooling
Water Intake Structures
EPA is developing regulations for
proposal under Section 316(b) of the Clean
Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. Section 1326(b).
The proposed regulation governing cooling
water intake structures is unique in that it applies
to the intake of water and not the discharge.
Section 316(b) provides that any standard
established pursuant to Sections 301 or 306 of
the Clean Water Act and applicable to a point
source shall require that the location, design,
construction, and capacity of cooling water
intake structures reflect the best technology
available (BTA) for minimizing adverse
environmental impact.
A primary purpose of Section 316(b) is
to minimize the impingement and entrainment of
fish and other aquatic organisms by a facility's
cooling water intake. Impingement refers to the
trapping offish and other aquatic life in cooling
water intake screens. Entrainment occurs when
aquatic organisms, eggs and larvae are sucked
into the cooling system, through the heat
exchanger, and then pumped back out. EPA is
currently estimating costs and benefits of this
rule and will make them available when the rule
is proposed.
SA-5
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations:
Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule
The regulation for Stage 1
Disinfectant/Disinfection Byproducts (DBFs) is
intended to expand existing public health
protections and address concerns about risk
trade-offs between pathogens and disinfection
byproducts. EPA has estimated that the total
annualized cost, for implementing the Stage 1
DBF rule is $702 million in 1998 dollars. This
estimate includes annualized treatment costs to
utilities ($593 million), start-up and annualized
monitoring costs to utilities ($91.7 million), and
startup and annualized monitoring costs to states
($17.3 million).
Annualized treatment costs to utilities
includes annual operation and maintenance costs
($362 million) and annualized capital costs
assuming a 7 percent cost of capital as the
discount rate ($231 million). While the benefits
of this rule are difficult to quantify because of
the uncertainty associated with risks from
exposure to DBFs (and the resultant reductions
in risk due the decreased exposure from DBFs),
EPA believes that there is reasonable likelihood
that benefits will exceed the costs. The potential
economic benefits of the Stage 1 DBF rule
derive from the increased level of public health
protection and associated decreased level of risk.
The quantification of the benefits
resulting from DBF control is masked by the
uncertainty in the understanding of the health
risks. Epidemiological studies, suggest an
association between bladder cancer and
exposure to chlorinated surface water; however,
these risks are uncertain. The lowest estimate
from five selected epidemiological studies of the
number of new bladder cancer cases per year
attributable to chlorinated surface water is 1,100
cases, while the highest is 9,300 cases.
In contrast, lexicological studies yield
baseline estimates of 1 to 100 new cancer cases
per year attributable to DBFs in surface water.
The rule is estimated to reduce DBF levels in
finished drinking water by 24% on average. The
final DBF Stage I rule was signed in November
1998.
National Primary Drinking Water
Enhanced Surface
Regulations: Interim
Water Treatment Rule
The regulation for Interim Enhanced
Surface Water Treatment is intended to expand
existing public health protections and address
concerns about risk trade-offs between
pathogens and disinfection byproducts. As
reflected in the November, 1998 Interim
Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
(D3SWTR) Regulatory Impact Analysis, EPA
estimated the national capital and annualized
costs of possible EESWTR provisions would be
$759 million and $307 million, respectively.
These estimates include costs associated
with improved treatment, turbidity monitoring, a
disinfection benchmark, and sanitary surveys.
Mean estimated annual benefits of the
provisions range from $348 million to $1.6
billion , depending upon varied baseline and
improved Cryptosporidium removal
assumptions with corresponding reduced cases
of cryptosporidiosis illness ranging from
110,000 to 463,000. The final IESWTR was
signed in November 1998.
National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations: Ground Water Rule
The Safe Drinking Water Act as
amended in 1996 directs EPA to promulgate
regulations requiring disinfection "as necessary"
for ground water systems. The intention is to
reduce microbial contamination risk from public
water systems relying on groundwater. To
determine if treatment is necessary, the rule will
establish a framework to identify public water
supplies vulnerable to microbial contamination
and to develop and implement risk control
strategies including but not limited to
disinfection.
From a public health perspective, the
Ground Water Rule will reduce both endemic
levels and outbreaks of illness. The economic
analyses for this rule are still under
development. EPA plans to propose this rule in
September 1999.
SA-6
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
National Pr
Regulations: Arsenic
SDWA directs EPA to establish a
maximum contaminant level (MCL) as close to
the maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG)
as feasible, considering treatment efficacy and
costs. EPA must list affordable technologies or
treatment techniques that achieve compliance
with the MCL for three categories of small
systems considering the quality of the source
water.
Furthermore, alternatives to central
treatment, such as point-of-use and point-of-
entry devices, can be considered for small
systems that maintain control over operation and
maintenance. At the time of proposal, EPA
must seek comment on its analyses of costs of
compliance and health risk reduction benefits
likely to occur as the result of treatment to
comply with the proposed MCL and any
alternatives being considered. The cost-benefit
analyses are still under development at this time.
EPA plans to propose this rule in January 2000.
National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations: Radon
Pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act
as amended in 1996, EPA is required to:
(1) withdraw the 1991 proposed radon in d
rinking water rule;
(2) work with the National Academy of
Sciences to conduct a risk assessment
for radon in drinking water and assess
the health risk reduction benefits
associated with various mitigation
methods of reducing radon in indoor air;
(3) publish a radon health risk reduction and
cost analysis for possible radon
Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs)
for public comment, by February, 1999;
(4) propose a Maximum Contaminant Level
Goal (MCLG) and National Primary
Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR)
for radon by August, 1999; and
(5) publish an MCLG and Final NPDWR
for radon by August, 2000.
EPA is currently developing estimates
of the anticipated costs and benefits associated
with this regulation. Among other things, EPA
will be evaluating the unit risk information (with
the input of the National Academy of Sciences),
the occurrence of radon in public water systems,
the unit costs of various types of radon in water
treatment systems, the characterization of the
flows associated with "model" systems, the
number of systems in various size categories, the
costs and benefits associated with the health
effects of radon, and models for integrating
much of these data.
Most of this information and supporting
calculations are expected to be available by the
time the Health Risk Reduction and Cost
Analysis is published (February 1999).
Effluent Guideline for Industrial Laundries
The proposed effluent guidelines
rulemaking for the industrial laundries industry
would limit the discharges of pollutants into
waters of the United States and into publicly
owned treatment works (POTWs) by
establishing pretreatment standards for existing
sources (PSES). The proposed rule would
benefit the environment by removing toxic
pollutants that have adverse effects on human
health and aquatic life. The standards would
also reduce potential interference with POTW
operations. The proposed PSES limitations
would reduce the discharge of pollutants to
waters of the U.S. by 5 million pounds per year.
EPA estimates that these pollutant
reductions would provide several types of
benefits including: reduced incidences of cancer,
recreational fishing improvements, non-use
benefits, and reduced interference with POTW
operations. EPA estimates annual benefits in the
range of $2.9 million to $10.6 million (1997
dollars).
Other benefits that are expected, but
have not been expressed in monetary terms,
include reduced noncancer health effects, and
enhanced recreation other than fishing (e.g.
swimming, boating). The estimated total
annualized social cost for the standards is $139.4
SA-7
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
million (1997 dollars), which incorporates
capital costs of $470 million and annual
operating and maintenance costs of $86 million
using a 7 percent discount rate. EPA plans to
issue this final rule in June 1999.
GOAL 3: SAFE FOOD
Ground Water and Pesticide Management
Plan
(Final Action 09/99). This final
regulation would establish Pesticide
Management Plans (PMPs) as a new regulatory
requirement for certain pesticides. Absent an
EPA-approved Plan specifying risk-reduction
measures, use of the chemical would be
prohibited. The rule would also specify
procedures and deadlines for development,
approval and modification of plans.
EPA anticipates four categories of costs
entailed in requiring PMPs. Federal Program
Costs are those of administering ground-water
protection activities, such as the review of State
or Tribal proposals. State Program Costs entail
both capital and annual costs. Registrant and
user impacts are the economic losses ascribed to
the reduced use of the classified pesticides, as
well as the costs (to the registrants) of
complying with Federal, State and Tribal
provisions.
Benefits accrue from the reduced levels
of pesticide residues in ground water, and a
corresponding reduction in: 1) human and
ecological risk; and 2) threats to the economic
and intrinsic values of the ground-water
resource. Enormous uncertainties attend the
quantification of these benefits. Because the
Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) requires
that EPA consider drinking water as part of
dietary exposure, the Agency is analyzing
implications for this regulation.
Pesticide Tolerance Reassessment Program
(a series of regulatory actions issued over 10
years)
EPA will reassess pesticide tolerances
and exemptions for raw and processed foods
established prior to August 3,1996, to determine
whether they meet the "reasonable certainty of
no harm" standard of the Federal Food, Drug
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). FFDCA sec.
408(q), as amended by the Food Quality
Protection Act, requires that EPA conduct mis
reassessment on a phased 10-year schedule.
Based on its reassessment, EPA will take a
series of regulatory actions to modify or revoke
tolerances that do not meet the reasonable
certainty of no harm standard.
Analysis of costs will be conducted as
part of an economic analysis of the
revocation/modification actions proposed. The
FFDCA allows EPA to consider benefits only in
a very limited manner in determining whether to
retain or modify a pesticide tolerance. Actions
taken as a result of the tolerance reassessment
program will ensure that dietary exposures to
pesticides will be safe, taking into account
aggregate exposure from food, water and
non-occupational sources, and considering the
cumulative effects of substances have a common
mode of toxicity.
Endocrine Disruptor Screening and Testing
Program
The Food Quality Protection Act
(FQPA) requires EPA to screen pesticides for
estrogenic effects on human health. The Safe
Drinking Water Act authorizes EPA to screen
chemicals found in drinking water sources in
similar manner. EPA proposed a screening
program in August 1998, and FQPA mandated
that it be implemented by August 1999 and
report to Congress in August 2000.
EPA established the Endocrine
Disruptor Screening and Testing Advisory
Committee (EDSTAC) in October 1996, to
provide advice and counsel to the Agency in
SA-8
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
implementing the screening and testing program.
EDSTAC was comprised of 43 members
representing industry, government,
environmental and public health groups, labor
academia, and other interested stakeholders.
EPA was represented on EDSTAC by OPPTS,
ORD and OW EDSTAC has held its final
meeting in June 1998.
The Committee considered human
health and ecological effects; estrogenic,
androgenic, anti-estrogenic, anti-androgenic and
thyroid effects in its deliberations and extended
its scope to include industrial chemicals,
drinking water contaminants and important
mixtures as well as pesticides. EDSTAC will
submit its final report to EPA in August 1998.
EPA will propose its screening and testing
strategy in August 1998 and will propose a more
detailed implementation plan for public
comment in fall of 1998.
Evidence is continuing to mount that
wildlife and humans may be at risk from
exposure to chemicals operating through a
endocrine mediated pathway. Preliminary
studies show decreases on IQ tests and increases
in aggression and hyperactivity in children.
Severe malformations of the genitals of boys has
increased steadily over the last two decades.
Although increases in cancers of
endocrine sensitive tissues have been reported,
no link has been made to show that chemicals
are the cause. Wildlife effects linked to specific
chemical exposures have been more thoroughly
documented in the U.S., Europe, Japan, Canada
and Australia. Evidence is sufficient for the
U.S. to proceed on a two track strategy; research
on the basic science regarding endocrine
disruption and screening to identify which
chemicals are capable of interacting with the
endocrine system. The combination of research
and test data developed by this program will
enable EPA to take action to reduce chemical
risks.
It is too early to project the costs and
benefits of this program accurately. However,
as a rough estimate, the screening battery is
estimated to cost $200,000 per chemical. It is
too early to determine how many chemicals will
be screened in Tier 1 much less tested in Tier 2.
It is also too early to tell the benefits-that is how
many chemicals will be identified that are
endocrine disrupters and their exposure reduced
either by formal risks management or by
voluntary exposure reduction or product
substitution.
GOAL 4: PREVENTING POLLUTION IN COMMUNITIES HOMES AND WORKPLACES
Proposed Lead Rulemaking Under TSCA
Section 402. Lead-Based Paint Activities
(Final rule Remodeling & Renovation
09/01; Final Rule Debris 11/00; Final Rule
Buildings and Structures).
The Residential Lead-Based Hazard
Reduction Act of 1992 (TitleX) amended TSCA
by adding a new Title IV. TSCA Section 402,
Lead-Based Paint Activities Training and
Certification directs EPA to promulgate:
(a) regulations governing lead-based paint
activities to ensure that individuals
engaged in such activities are properly
trained, that training programs are
accredited, and that contractors engaged
in such activities are certified;
(b) a Model State program which may be
adopted by any State which seeks to
administer and enforce a State Program
for the requirements established under
SCA Section 402;
(c) a rule addressing lead risks from
renovation and remodeling activities or
state when no regulation is necessary;
and
(d) a rule establishing a fee schedule for the
lead based paint training, certification,
and accreditation activities addressed in
the rules developed under TSCA Section
402.
SA-9
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Additionally, in response to concerns
that high disposal costs would discourage lead
abatements, EPA is using its authority under
f SCA Section 402 (a) to address the disposal of
lead-based paint debris that will result from the
lead-based paint activities regulated under
TSCA Section 402. To minimize duplication of
waste management requirements, EPA is
developing a companion RCRA rule to suspend
temporarily hazardous waste management
regulations applicable to lead-based paint debris
which will be subject to the new TSCA
standards.
For the Section 402(a)/404(Residential)
rule, the costs ($16 million in the initial year,
$10 million in subsequent years) have been
provided in the final economic impact analysis
that was prepared in conjunction with the final
rule. For the remainder of the Section 402 rules,
costs will be estimated in the draft economic
impact analyses that will be prepared for the
proposed rules. Since benefits depend on
private sector implementation of certain lead
hazard abatement activities which are not
mandated by any of these rules, benefits will be
difficult to quantify.
TSCA Section 403: Identification of
Dangerous Levels of Lead (Final Rule
09/99)
TSCA Section 403 requires EPA to
promulgate regulations that identify lead-based
paint hazards, lead-contaminated dust and
lead-contaminated soil. EPA published an
interim guidance document in 1995, to provide
public and private decision-makers with
guidance on identifying an prioritizing
lead-based paint hazards for control.
This interim guidance will continue to
serve as EPA's official policy until the final
TSCA Section 403 rule is promulgated. EPA
proposed the Section 403 Rule in June 1998.
Net benefits to society associated with the
proposed standards were estimated to equal
$42.5 billion over a fifty year period.
Polvchlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Disposal
Amendments (Final Rule on Use
Authorizations 03/99; Notice/Decisions on
Import Issue 09/99)
This mlemaking will make over 90
modification, additions, and deletions to the
existing PCB management program under the
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). A
notice of proposed rulemaking was published on
December 6,1994, and covered the manufacture
(including import) processing, distribution in
commerce, export use, disposal, and marking of
PCBs. On Jun 29,1998, EPA issued a final rule
involving the disposal related provisions. The
other provisions, regarding use authorizations
and imports, will be addressed in separate
actions.
EPA projects significant cost savings
from authorizations for existing uses and the
disposal of large-volume wastes such as
PCB-contaminated environmental media. In
addition, certain administrative requirements
should increase the speed of remediation of
contaminated sites and accelerate the removal
from use of PCBs.
EPA projects minimal implementation
costs and is reviewing comments which
highlight areas for additional cost savings over
the proposal. EPA estimates that millions of
tons of PCB-contaminated environmental media
will be remediated under this rule, thus
preventing large quantities of this long-lived,
bioaccoumulating chemical from entering the
food chain.
Chemical Rieht-to-Know (RTK) Initiative
Vice President Gore announced the
Chemical RTK Initiative to encourage the
provision of information about the toxicity of
commercial chemicals. There are three key
components to this initiative:
(1) baseline toxicity testing for 2,800
widely used commercial chemicals;
SA-10
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
(2) additional health effects testing for
chemicals to which children are
disproportionately exposed; and
(3) the listing and lowering thresholds for
persistent, bioaccumulative, toxic
chemicals reported to TRI.
The benefits of the Chemical
Right-to-Know Initiative are unknown, but may
be substantial in terms of assisting risk
management and avoidance decisions. The cost
of the baseline testing is approximately
$200,000 per chemical. More detailed testing,
as envisioned for the Children's Health testing
portion of this initiative is expected to impose
additional costs.
GOAL 5: BETTER WASTE MANAGEMENT, RESTORATION OF CONTAMINATED
WASTE SITES, AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
Revised Standards for Hazardous Waste
Combustion Facilities
The Combustion MACT Standards
rulemaking was proposed in April 1996, with
the final rulemaking currently scheduled for
signature in 1999. This is a joint action that
invokes the authorities of both the Clean Air Act
(CAA) and RCRA. The Final Rule will set
technology-based emission limits for hazardous
waste incinerators, cement kilns, and LWAKs,
using the Maximum Achievable Control
Technologies (MACT) provisions under Sec.
112 of the CAA.
Aggregate compliance costs for all
sources to meet the final recommended
standards are estimated to average about $75
million per year. Individual combustion systems
are likely to experience annual compliance costs
ranging from $244,000 to $1.0 million,
depending upon equipment retrofit requirements.
An estimated two (2) cement kilns and
approximately thirteen (13) on-site incinerators
may stop burning hazardous waste in response to
implementation of the final recommended
standards.
The MACT standards are expected to
provide both human health and ecological
benefits. Preliminary benefits have been
monetized for both cancer and non-cancer
effects. Ecological benefits have not been
monetized. Human health benefits for the final
standards are currently estimated at about $25
million per year. Other benefits potentially
attributable to the final Rule, such as improved
visibility were not estimated.
GOAL 7: COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW
TRI: Addition of Oil and Gas Exploration
and Production to the Toxic Release
Inventory (Final Rule 12/00)
The original Toxics Release Inventory
(TRI) required reporting from facilities in
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes
20-39. These SIC codes cover facilities whose
primary economic activity was classified as
manufacturing. This requirement was specified
under the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-To-Know Act (EPCRA).
EPCRA provides the Administrator with
the authority to add or delete SIC codes and the
discretion to add particular facilities based on a
broad set of factors. EPA has recently expanded
this original list of covered industries. EPA
began additional analyses to determine whether
facilities which perform exploration and
production of oil and gas should also be added to
the list of facilities covered under EPCRA. No
final decision on this issue has been made.
SA-11
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
Based on the current status of the
project, anticipated costs are unknown.
Estimated costs for compliance with EPCRA
reporting requirements are available, but until
further evaluation is completed no estimates are
available for the impact of the resulting
requirements on any industries that may be
added. Generally, anticipated benefits will be in
the form of making available more complete
information regarding the release and disposition
of toxic chemicals in the environment.
TRI: Chemical Expansion: Finalization of
Deferred Chemicals (Final Action 12/00)
On November 30, 1994, EPA added 286
chemicals and chemical categories to EPCRA
Section 313 list, including 39 chemicals as part
of two delineated categories. Each chemical and
chemical category was found to meet the
statutory criteria described in EPCRA. At this
time, EPA deferred final action on 40 chemicals
and one chemical category until a later date.
These were deferred because the comments
received on them raised difficult technical or
policy issues which required additional time to
address.
EPA chose not to delay final action on
the 286 chemical and chemical categories
because of the additional time needed to address
the issues surrounding the smaller group of 40
chemicals and one chemical category; rather,
EPA believed it to be in the spirit of
right-to-know to proceed with the final
rulemaking of the additional chemicals and
chemical categories.
The final total costs are not yet known,
since the final listing decisions have not yet been
made. The addition of any of these chemicals or
the chemical category will result in additional
costs to the reporting community. The
additional information reported in TRI increases
the public's knowledge regarding the levels of
pollutants released to the environment and
pathways of exposure.
It allows the public to make informed
decisions on where to work and live; enhances
the ability of corporate lenders and purchasers to
more accurately determine a facility's potential
liabilities; and assists Federal, State, and local
authorities making better decisions on
acceptable levels of toxics in communities.
TRI: Pollution Prevention Act Information
Requirements (Final Action 06/00)
The Pollution Prevention Act of 1990
(PPA) requires the addition of several data
elements to the Toxic Chemical Release
Inventory (TRI) reporting requirements. It
requires owners or operators of certain facilities
that manufacture, process, or otherwise use
listed toxic chemicals to annually report their
releases of these chemicals to each
environmental medium. The PPA mandates that
facilities also report on source reduction and
recycling activities relating to the toxic
chemicals beginning with the 1991 reporting
year.
Since 1991 covered facilities have been
providing this information to EPA in Section
8A, Source Reduction and Recycling Activities,
of EPA Form R. EPA's proposed regulation
would provide definitions and instructions for
reporting the PPA data elements on the EPA
FormR.
Because of the inconsistencies in the
PPA data currently reported on the Form R,
communities are unable to accurately compare
the risks related to release and recycling
activities between different facilities. By
providing covered facilities with clear guidance
for reporting this information, the public will be
better equipped to determine and compare the
risks associated with toxic chemicals being
released and managed in their community.
EPA estimates industry currently incurs
a cost of $61.3 million annually to report PPA
data on Form R. This estimate does not include
the costs related to the seven industries newly
subject to EPCRA 313. The cost to process
source reduction and waste management data
equals $2.7 million each year. This action is
SA-12
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1999 Final Annual Plan
not expected to add to these existing costs, and
may actually result in a reduction to the overall
industry burden and costs.
TRI: Reporting Threshold Amendment:
Toxic Chemicals Release Reporting:
Community Right-to-Know (Final Action
09/99)
The Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)
currently requires reporting from facilities which
manufacture or process at least 25,000 pounds of
a listed chemical, or otherwise use 10,000
pounds of a listed chemical. These thresholds
were initially established under the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-know Act
(EPCRA). EPCRA gives the Administrator the
power to establish a threshold amount for a toxic
chemical different from the amount established
by paragraph (1) and that such altered thresholds
may be based on classes of chemicals.
EPA is considering lowering the
thresholds for those chemicals which it
determines to be highly toxic at very low dose
levels and/or have physical, chemical, or
biological properties that make the chemicals
persist for extended periods in the environment,
and/or bioaccumulate through the food chain.
Persistent bioaccumulative toxic chemicals are
of particular concern in ecosystems such as the
Great Lakes Basin due to the long retention time
of the individual lakes and the cycling of the
chemicals from on component of the ecosystem
to another. EPA is currently conducting analysis
to determine which chemicals present the
specific problems described above, and to
determine what the altered threshold value(s)
should be.
Currently communities do not have
access to TRI data on chemicals that, although
released in relatively small quantities, pose a
potential risk to human health and the
environment because they persist and
bioaccumulate. By lowering the reporting
thresholds for such chemicals the public will be
able to determine if such chemicals are being
released into their communities and whether any
action should be taken to reduce potential risks.
The anticipated costs related to this
action are unknown at present. At this point the
Agency is still unsure how low to set reporting
thresholds or for what specific list of chemicals
the lower reporting thresholds should apply.
The information reported in TRI increases the
knowledge levels of pollutants released to the
environment and pathways to exposure; allows
the public to make informed decisions on where
to work and live; enhances the ability of
corporate lenders and purchasers to more
accurately determine a facility's potential
liability; and assists Federal, State, and local
authorities in making better decisions on
acceptable levels of toxics in communities.
TRI: Review of Chemicals on the Original
TRI List (Final Rule 12/00)
When TRI was established by Congress
in 1986, the statutory language placed 309
chemicals and 20 categories of chemicals on the
TRI list; that is referred to as the original TRI
list. The chemicals on the original list were
taken from two existing lists of toxic substances:
the Maryland Chemical Inventory Report List of
Toxic or Hazardous Substances, and the New
Jersey Environmental Hazardous Substances list.
This action constitutes the first systematic
review of toxicology and environmental data for
all the chemicals on the original TRI list to
determine whether data for those chemicals
conform with the statutory criteria for listing of
chemicals on TRI. Chemicals for which data do
not meet the statutory criteria will be delisted.
TRI provides information to industry,
governments and the public on chemicals that can
cause harm to health or the environment The review
of toxicology and environmental data for all
chemicals on the original TRI list will ensure that the
list focuses only on those chemicals that pose
meaningful possibilities of risks to human health or
the environment, increasing the effectiveness of the
TRI.
The anticipated costs to industry related to
this action are unknown at present. Costs to industry
would be reduced if chemicals are removed from the
TRI list. Benefits would result from any reduction in
reporting burden as a result of the delisting of a
chemical.
SA-13
-------
*
13"
*lif.i"
------- |