R^
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan
Charting Our Course
-------
EPA's MISSION:
To Protect Human Health
and the Environment
-------
-------
Message from the
Administrator
September 2006
I am pleased to present the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA) 2006-2011 Strategic Plan,
I which charts an ambitious course for the Agency's
work over the next five years.
This Strategic Plan maintains the five goals that were first described in the
2003-2008 Plan and discusses important new challenges and opportunities that
are likely to arise in the coming years. The 2006-2011 Plan better expresses the
results of our work and more clearly identifies the environmental and human
health outcomes the public can expect. The Plan also expands upon some of our
more significant geographic initiatives and reflects increased collaboration with
our state, tribal, local, and federal partners.
In December 2005, EPA celebrated 35 years of working to protect human
health and the environment. Since 1970, EPA—in collaboration with our
partners and stakeholders—has been delivering a cleaner, healthier environment
for the public. From regulating auto emissions to banning the use of DDT; from
cleaning up toxic waste to protecting the ozone layer; and from increasing
recycling to revitalizing inner-city brownfields, EPA's achievements have
resulted in cleaner air, purer water, and better protected land.
The President has charged EPA with accelerating the pace of environmental
protection while maintaining our nation's economic competitiveness. This Plan
lays the foundation to meet our long-term goals and demonstrate progress along
the way, consistent with our principles of results and accountability, innovation
and collaboration, and the use of the best available science. We are grateful to
our partners and stakeholders for their continuing help in achieving these goals,
and pledge to continue our efforts to ensure a safe and healthy environment for
future generations.
Stephen L. Johnson
Administrator
-------
Contents
CONTENTS
Introduction 5
Goal 1—Clean Air and Global Climate Change 8
Objective 1.1: Healthier Outdoor Air 12
Objective 1.2: Healthier Indoor Air 19
Objective 1.3: Protect the Ozone Layer 20
Objective 1.4: Radiation 21
Objective 1.5: Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions 23
Objective 1.6: Enhance Science and Research 25
Goal 2—Clean and Safe Water 32
Objective 2.1: Protect Human Health 36
Objective 2.2: Protect Water Quality 43
Objective 2.3: Enhance Science and Research 50
Goal 3—Land Preservation and Restoration 58
Objective 3.1: Preserve Land 62
Objective 3.2: Restore Land 67
Objective 3.3: Enhance Science and Research 72
Goal 4—Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 78
Objective 4.1: Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide Risks 83
Objective 4.2: Communities 91
Objective 4.3: Restore and Protect Critical Ecosystems 97
Objective 4.4: Enhance Science and Research 109
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
Goal 5—Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 126
Objective 5.1: Achieve Environmental Protection
Through Improved Compliance 130
Objective 5.2: Improve Environmental Performance
Through Pollution Prevention and Other
Stewardship Practices 133
Objective 5.3: Improve Human Health and the
Environment in Indian Country 138
Objective 5.4: Enhance Society's Capacity for Sustainability
Through Science and Research 140
Cross-Goal Strategies 146
Results and Accountability 149
Innovation and Collaboration 152
Best Available Science 158
Appendix A: Social Costs and Benefits 163
Appendix B: Proposed Future Program Evaluations 165
Appendix C: Summary of Consultation Efforts 173
Appendix D: Areas of Coordination Between
EPA and Other Federal Agencies
.179
-------
Introduction
INTRODUCTION
Since the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was
established in 1970, we have worked with our federal, state,
tribal, and local government partners to advance our mission
to protect human health and the environment. Together, we have
made tremendous progress in protecting and restoring the nation's
air, water, and land.
But while we have achieved a great deal, we recognize
that much work remains. The environmental problems we are fac-
ing in 2006 are more complex than those of 30 years ago, and
implementing solutions is more challenging. Recent national and
international events, such as the devastation left by Hurricane
Katrina, the advance of Avian flu, threats to homeland security, and population growth and its
associated resource consumption, are altering the environment in unprecedented ways.
Scientific advances and emerging technologies offer new opportunities for protecting human
health and the environment, but also pose new risks and challenges. We recognize that today's
environmental problems cannot be solved by traditional regulatory controls alone; they will
require the combined expertise, perspectives, and resources of many. More than ever before, we
need to look toward the future to anticipate potential threats to human health and the envi-
ronment, establish clear priorities, and prepare ourselves to address them.
OUR GOALS AN
GOALS OF THE 2006-2011 STRATEGIC PLAN
• Clean Air and Global Climate Change
• Clean and Safe Water
• Land Preservation and Restoration
• Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
• Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
CROSS-GOAL STRATEGIES
• Results and Accountability
• Innovation and Collaboration
• Best Available Science
STRATEGIES
EPA's 2006-20JJ Strategic
Plan sets out an ambitious
road map for environmental
protection over the next
5 years. In developing this
Plan, we have sharpened our
focus on achieving measurable
environmental results. Our
five strategic goals reflect
the results we are striving
to achieve: Clean Air and
Global Climate Change,
Clean and Safe Water, Land
Preservation and Restoration
Healthy Communities and
Ecosystems, and Compliance
and Environmental
Stewardship.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
EPA Administrator Steve Johnson has
established key principles to accelerate the pace
of environmental protection, and these three
principles are reflected in our "cross-goal"
strategies—common themes for our work under
each of our strategic goals:
• Results and Accountability. EPA is committed
to being a good steward of our environment
and a good steward of America's tax dollars.
To provide the public with the environmental
results it expects and deserves, we must operate
as efficiently and effectively as possible.
Accountability for results is a key component
of the President's Management Agenda,
designed to make government citizen-centered,
results-oriented, and market-based.
Innovation and Collaboration. Our progress depends both on our ability and continued
commitment to identify and use innovative tools, approaches, and solutions to address
environmental problems and to engage extensively with our partners, stakeholders, and
the public. Under each of our goals, we are working to promote a sense of environmental
stewardship and a shared responsibility for addressing today's challenges.
Best Available Science. EPA needs the best scientific information available to anticipate
potential environmental threats, evaluate risks, identify solutions, and develop protective
standards. Sound science helps us ask the right questions, assess information, and characterize
problems clearly to inform Agency decision makers.
GUIDING MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET DECISIONS
In setting out our goals for the coming
5 years and describing how we intend to
achieve them, our Strategic Plan provides
the foundation for all of EPA's planning,
budgeting, performance measurement, and
accountability processes. We will design
annual performance goals and measures,
which are presented in the President's budget
request to Congress, to achieve the long-term
strategic goals set out in this Plan. We will
report on our performance against these
annual goals and measures in our annual
Performance and Accountability Report and
use this performance information as we establish priorities and develop future budget submis-
sions. This process will come full circle as we evaluate these performance data to develop our
2009-2014 and future Strategic Plans. In addition, our strategic planning and decision making
-------
Introduction
benefit from information provided by new environmental indicators that we are developing,
in particular for our forthcoming Report on the Environment. Information derived from these
indicators help us better articulate and further improve the long-term measures contained in
our Strategic Plan.
IMPROVING OUR STRATEGIC PLAN
While EPA's 2006-20 J J Strategic Plan retains the five-goal
structure introduced in our 2003 Plan, it contains a number of
improvements and additions. For example, under each goal we
have provided a discussion of "Emerging Issues and External
Factors"—important new challenges and opportunities that are
likely to arise in the coming years. The goal chapters also
include new information about developing the long-term
measures included in the Plan, particularly their relationship to
annual performance measures, measures provided in the Office
of Management and Budget's Program Assessment Rating Tool,
and the new environmental indicators being developed for
EPA's Report on the Environment. This Plan also reflects our
increased emphasis on activities and measures that address
tribal environmental and health issues, environmental justice
concerns, environmental stewardship, and strategic manage-
ment of human capital.
We have prepared this Strategic Plan to present our vision for the future and to guide our
work over the coming years to achieve these results. We hope that you will join with us to
realize our common desire for a cleaner, healthier environment for all Americans.
Lyons Gray
Chief Financial Officer
-------
-------
Protect and improve the air so it is
healthy to breathe and risks to human
health and the environment are reduced.
Reduce greenhouse gas intensity by
enhancing partnerships with businesses
and other sectors.
-------
EPA, together with state, tribal and local partners, is addressing a
broad range of national air quality problems cost-effectively with a
variety of regulatory and non-regulatory approaches, including
innovative, market-based techniques such as emissions trading, banking,
and averaging. EPA also works closely with public- and private-sector
partners and stakeholders to develop tools, such as monitoring, modeling,
and emission inventories, that allow states, tribes, and localities to address
more localized problems. Many of these tools employ innovative techniques,
such as partnership programs for retrofitting diesel engines or community-
based approaches to toxics, which are well-suited to the local nature of
these challenges,
EPA's programs will allow us, together with our partners, to make substantial progress in protecting
human health and ecosystems from air pollution. By 2011, virtually all of the country will have put in
place controls to meet current air quality standards. New motor vehicles, including trucks and buses,
will be 75 to 95 percent cleaner than they were in 2003. Power plant emissions will be reduced by
approximately 40 percent from 2003 levels. Taken together, these programs, when fully implemented,
will prevent tens of thousands of premature deaths and hospitalizations, and prevent millions of lost
work and school days each year. These national programs will be supplemented by local control
strategies designed to ensure that the air quality standards are achieved and maintained.
Reductions in emissions of air toxics will substantially reduce risks to human health. Toxic
emissions from cars, trucks, and buses will be cut in half, and all major industrial sources of air toxics
will meet technology-based standards. Additional risk reductions will be achieved by voluntary
programs aimed at indoor hazards such as radon, tobacco smoke, and asthma triggers, and outdoor
hazards such as overexposure to the sun. Radiation releases will be minimized, and our ability to
monitor such releases will be enhanced. Should a radiation release occur, EPA personnel and assets
will be in place and prepared to support federal emergency response and to minimize impacts to
human health and the environment.
Significant achievements will also be realized in EPA's domestic and international efforts to protect
and restore the world's atmosphere. By 2011, worldwide efforts to protect the earth's ozone layer will
reach a watershed, as total effective equivalent stratospheric chlorine reaches its peak and begins to
decline. And EPA's voluntary climate protection programs will put us on track to exceed the
President's greenhouse gas intensity goal.
William L. Wehrum
Acting Assistant Administrator
Office of Air and Radiation
10
-------
GOAL
/ J A
r^\ 1 1
Global
OBJECTIVES
Objective I.I
Outdoor Air
Air pollution comes from many sources: factories and
power plants; drycleaners; cars, buses, and trucks; even
windblown dust and wildfires. It can threaten human
health, causing breathing difficulties, long-term damage to
respiratory and reproductive sys-
tems, cancer, and premature
death. Certain chemicals emitted
into the air diminish the protective
ozone layer in the upper atmos-
phere, resulting in overexposure to
ultraviolet radiation and increased
rates of skin cancer, cataracts, and
other health and ecological effects.
Air pollution can also affect the
environment by reducing visibility;
damaging crops, forests, and build-
ings; acidifying lakes and streams;
and stimulating the growth of algae
in estuaries and the build-up of
toxins in fish. These effects pose a
particular risk to Native Americans
and others who subsist on plants,
fish, and game. Rapid development
and urbanization in other countries
Healthier
Objective 12: Healthier
Indoor Air., ..I 9
Objective 1.3: Protect the
Ozone Layer 20
EPA works to protect human health and the
environment by developing regulations and establishing
partnerships with other federal agencies, states, tribes,
local governments, business and industry, environmental
groups, and other stakeholders in pro-
grams to reduce air pollution. And
according to our annual summary of
air quality trends since the 1970s,1 air
quality in the United States has steadily
improved. Even as our economy has
grown, miles traveled by cars and trucks
increased, and energy consumption
risen, the trend toward cleaner air has
continued.
.12
Objective 1.4: Radiation . . .
Objective 1.5: Reduce
Greenhouse Gas Emissions 23
Objective 1.6: Enhance
Science and Research . . .25
EPA is dedicated to improving the
quality of the air Americans breathe,
and we will continue to look for innova-
tive, effective solutions to the nation's
remaining air pollution problems. We
use a variety of approaches and tools to
accomplish this. For example, we are
addressing problems with broad national
or global impact—emissions from power
plants and other large sources, pollution from motor vehi-
cles and fuels, and stratospheric ozone depletion—at the
are creating air pollution that threatens not only those
countries but also the United States, since air pollution , , , , , ,. . , , ,
, ,. j • 11 j • federal level, using our traditional regulatory tools as
can travel great distances and across national boundaries. „ . , , , , . ,
well as innovative, market-based techniques such as
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
emissions trading, banking, and averaging.
We are working with states, tribes, and local
agencies to address regional and local ambient
air problems. Collaborating with public- and
private-sector partners, we are developing
tools and innovative strategies, such as part-
nership programs for retrofitting diesel engines
or community-based approaches to toxics, to
Comparison of Growth Areas
and Emissions
1955^,
Gross Domestic Product
Vehicle Miles Traveled
i Energy Consumption
Population
[gregate Emissions*(Six Principal Pollutants)
48%
help solve local problems and promote a com-
munity ethic of environmental stewardship.
We work with developing countries to reduce
transboundary air pollution, improve the
health of our citizens and theirs, and reduce
greenhouse gas emissions.
Many reports have highlighted the impor-
tance of the indoor environment to human
health, including the 1997 report of the
Presidential/Congressional Commission on Risk
Assessment and Risk Management. To improve
the quality of the air in homes, schools, and
commercial buildings, EPA relies on partner-
ship-based information and outreach programs,
which encourage and promote voluntary action.
Our radon and other indoor air programs have
helped to reduce asthma triggers, respiratory ail-
ments, ear infections, exposure to secondhand
tobacco smoke, and hospitalizations.
EPA research continues to identify new
air pollution issues, in areas from indoor air to
radiation. We will work with our federal,
state, tribal, local, and international partners
and stakeholders to address these issues using
approaches and programs that encourage cost-
effective technologies and practices.
OBJECTIVE 1.1: HEALTHIER OUTDOOR AIR
THROUGH 2011, WORKING WITH PARTNERS, PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH AND THE
ENVIRONMENT BY ATTAINING AND MAINTAINING HEALTH-BASED AIR-QUALITY
STANDARDS AND REDUCING THE RISK FROM TOXIC AIR POLLUTANTS.
Sub-objective 1.1.1: Ozone and PM25.
By 2015, working with partners, improve
air quality for ozone and PM2.5 as follows:
Strategic Targets
• By 2015, reduce the population-
weighted ambient concentration of
ozone in all monitored counties by
14 percent from the 2003 baseline.
• By 2015, reduce the population-
weighted ambient concentration of
PM2.5 in all monitored counties by
6 percent from the 2003 baseline.
• By 2011, reduce emissions of fine
particles from mobile sources by
134,700 tons from the 2000 level of
510,550 tons.
-------
Clean Air—Objective 1.1: Healthier Outdoor Air
• By 2011, reduce emissions of nitrogen
oxides (NOX) from mobile sources by
3.7 million tons from the 2000 level
of 11.8 million tons.
• By 2011, reduce emissions of volatile
organic compounds from mobile
sources by 1.9 million tons from the
2000 level of 7.7 million tons.
• By 2018, visibility in eastern Class I
areas will improve by 15 percent on
the 20 percent worst visibility days,
as compared to visibility on the
20 percent worst days during the
2000-2004 baseline period.
• By 2018, visibility in western Class I
areas will improve by 5 percent on
the 20 percent worst visibility days,
as compared to visibility on the
20 percent worst days during the
2000-2004 baseline period.
• By 2011, with EPA support, 30
additional tribes (6 per year) will
have completed air quality emission
inventories. (FY 2005 baseline: 28
tribal emission inventories.)
• By 2011, 18 additional tribes will
possess the expertise and capability to
implement the Clean Air Act in
Indian country2 (as demonstrated by
successful completion of an eligibility
determination under the Tribal
Authority Rule). (FY 2005 baseline:
24 tribes.)
Sub-objective 1.1.2: Air Toxics. By 2011,
reduce the risk to public health and the envi-
ronment from toxic air pollutants by working
with partners to reduce air toxics emissions
and implement area-specific approaches as
follows:
Strategic Targets
• By 2010, reduce toxicity-weighted
(for cancer risk) emissions of air toxi-
cs to a cumulative reduction of 19
percent from the 1993 non-weighted
baseline of 7.24 million tons.
By 2010, reduce toxicity-weighted
(for non-cancer risk) emissions of air
toxics to a cumulative reduction of 55
percent from the 1993 non-weighted
baseline of 7.24 million tons.
Sub-objective 1.1.3: Chronically Acidic
Water Bodies. By 2011, due to progress in
reducing acid deposition, the number of
chronically-acidic water bodies in acid-sensi-
tive regions of the northern and eastern
United States should be maintained at or
below the 2001 baseline of approximately 500
lakes and 5,000 kilometers of stream-length
in the population covered by the Temporally
Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems/Long-
Term Monitoring Survey. The long-term
target is a 30 percent reduction in the num-
ber of chronically-acidic water bodies in
acid-sensitive regions by 2030.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, reduce national annual
emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2)
from utility electrical power genera-
tion sources by approximately 8.45
million tons from the 1980 level of
17.4 million tons, achieving and main-
taining the acid rain statutory SO2
emissions cap of 8.95 million tons.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
• By 2011, reduce total annual average
sulfur deposition and mean ambient
sulfate concentration by 30 percent
from 1990 monitored levels of up to
25 kilograms per hectare for total sul-
fur deposition and 6.4 micrograms per
cubic meter for mean ambient sulfate
concentration.
• By 2011, reduce total annual average
nitrogen deposition and mean total
ambient nitrate concentration by 15
percent from 1990 monitored levels
of up to 11 kilograms per hectare for
total nitrogen deposition and 4.0
micrograms per cubic meter for mean
total ambient nitrate concentration.
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
ACHIEVING HEALTHIER OUTDOOR AIR
Our strategy for reducing outdoor air
pollution is based on collaboration at the
federal, state, and local levels. States are
primarily responsible for maintaining and
improving air quality and meeting national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS)
established by EPA. State programs develop
emission inventories, operate and maintain
air monitoring networks, perform air quality
modeling, and develop State Implementation
Plans (SIPs) that lay out control strategies for
improving air quality and meeting NAAQS.
Multi-jurisdictional organizations (MJOs) are
vital in addressing regional issues, collaborating
with states on control strategies, and providing
technical assistance in data analyses and air
quality modeling.
EPA assists states, tribes, local agencies,
and MJOs by providing technical guidance
and financial assistance to support their
efforts. We also develop regulations and
implement programs to reduce pollution from
the most widespread and significant sources
of air pollution: mobile sources, such as cars,
trucks, buses, and construction equipment,
and stationary sources, such as power plants,
oil refineries, chemical plants, and dry clean-
ing operations. In addition, we address at a
national level air quality issues that exceed
the reach of state and tribal authorities—such
as interstate transport of pollutants.
EPA is authorized to implement air quality
programs in Indian country; however, eligible
tribes may be authorized to develop and imple-
ment their own Clean Air Act programs. We
are working with tribes to acquire more and
better data on the quality of air on tribal
lands,3 build tribal capacity to administer air
programs in Indian country, and establish
mechanisms that will enable EPA and states to
work effectively with tribal governments on
regional and national policy issues. We will
assist any tribe interested in making a determi-
nation on its air quality by providing data,
data analysis, and technical support.
We will continue to involve communities,
civic organizations, and other stakeholders in
designing programs to achieve healthier out-
door air. We will work closely with the
National Environmental Justice Advisory
Council, community-based organizations, and
other stakeholders (including schools and uni-
versities, environmental organizations, and
business and industry groups) to ensure that
environmental justice is an integral part our
programs, policies, and activities. To support
this commitment, we will develop baseline
data that will enable us to track our progress
in addressing environmental justice concerns.
-------
Clean Air—Objective 1.1: Healthier Outdoor Air
EPA will continue to apply sound science
to help us better understand and characterize
the results of our efforts to achieve clean air.
EPA scientists will determine the relative risks
that air pollution poses to human health and
the environment; identify the best means to
detect, abate, and avoid environmental prob-
lems associated with air pollutants; and
evaluate the effectiveness of control programs
in reducing exposure to harmful levels of air
pollution. We are committed to common-
sense, cost-effective solutions that result in
cleaner air, and we will continue to integrate
critical scientific assessment with policy, regu-
latory, and non-regulatory activities. Using
mathematical models, data from ambient mon-
itoring and deposition monitoring, and other
information, we will work with states and
tribes to evaluate control options, control
plans, the impacts of alternative emission sce-
narios, and the effect of federal rules and other
control strategies. We will continue to conduct
exposure and risk assessments on criteria and
hazardous air pollutants, integrating monitor-
ing and modeling information to characterize
the impacts of sources of air pollution within
and outside of the United States.
OZONE AND PARTICULATE MATTER
To improve air quality, EPA will continue
to focus on implementing the fine particulate
matter (PM25) standards and 8-hour ozone
standards. In support of state efforts, we will
develop federal programs for mobile and sta-
tionary sources that achieve large,
nationwide, cost-effective reductions in emis-
sions of PM and its contributors (SO2, NOX,
and elemental and organic carbon), ozone-
forming NOX, and volatile organic
compounds. We will work with states to
reduce emissions of PM and ozone precursors
and mercury from electric-generating units
and to better integrate ozone and PM efforts,
for example, by improving emission invento-
ries, developing comprehensive air quality
modeling approaches, controlling sources of
precursors common to both, and coordinating
control strategy planning cycles. Working
with MJOs, we will develop strategies for
reducing regional haze.
Key to our efforts is implementing the
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), promul-
gated in May 2005, to address pollution from
power plants that drifts across state borders.
Like the cap-and-trade approach of our Acid
Rain Program, CAIR provides incentives for
power plant operators to find the best, fastest,
and most efficient ways to make the required
emission reductions. We expect CAIR to
reduce SO2 emissions by 4.3 million tons
(more than 70 percent) and NOX emissions
by 1.7 million tons (more than 60 percent)
from 2003 levels. As we implement CAIR,
we will also continue to support passage of
the President's Clear Skies legislation, which
would achieve broader reductions of SO2 and
NOX and provide more certainty for industry
and state and local air quality planners.
CAIR is an important component of
EPA's plan to help states in the eastern
United States meet EPA's health-based air
quality standards. Through CAIR and other
Clean Air Act programs, 92 of the 108 areas
that had not met the standards for 8-hour
ozone and 17 of the 36 areas that had not
met the standards for PM2 5 as of April 2005
will achieve these health-based national stan-
dards by 2011. We estimate that by 2015 air
quality improvements from CAIR and other
Clean Air Act programs could generate more
than $100 billion in health and visibility
Significant Cuts in NOX and SO2 Power
Plant Emissions Projected with CAIR
|,s
Projected, w/CAIR
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE: REDUCING DIESEL
EXHAUST IN HIGH IMPACT AREAS
benefits per year. We expect that by reducing
sulfur and nitrogen deposition, these pro-
grams will also reduce the incidence of
chronically acidic lakes and streams.
Working with our partners, EPA will
implement a series of national programs to
dramatically reduce emissions from a wide
range of mobile sources:
• The Tier 2 Vehicle and Gasoline
Sulfur Program, to be fully imple-
mented by 2009, will make new cars,
sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks,
and vans 7 7 to 95 percent cleaner
than 2003 models, while reducing sul-
fur levels in gasoline by 90 percent.
• Our Clean Diesel Truck and Bus
Program will require that, beginning
in 2007, all new highway diesel
engines be as much as 95 percent
cleaner than current models, while
reducing sulfur levels in highway
diesel fuel by more than 97 percent.
• The Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Rule
will cut emission levels from con-
struction, agricultural, and industrial
diesel-powered equipment by more
than 90 percent, while removing
99 percent of the sulfur in nonroad
diesel fuel by 2010. As part of this
effort, we are also developing more
stringent standards for locomotives,
large marine diesel engines, and small
gasoline engines (such as those used
in lawn and garden equipment).
To address diesel emissions, EPA's
National Clean Diesel program will continue
to develop new engine and fuel standards and
conduct activities to reduce emissions from
the 11 million diesel engines already in use.
For example, we will create cost-effective
diesel-retrofit partnerships to reduce NOX and
PM emissions from older, high-polluting
trucks, buses, and nonroad equipment, con-
centrating on nonattainment areas and areas
with sensitive populations and raising public
awareness of the risks diesel emissions pose to
health. We will provide grants for retrofitting,
replacing, and reducing idling from vehicles
and equipment in the trucking, railroad, con-
struction, school bus, and port sectors and
encourage states and industry to support local
diesel retrofit projects. These innovative ini-
tiatives will support states' efforts to meet
national air quality standards.
Implementing provisions of the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 will be a major undertak-
ing for EPA. Central to this effort is the
Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program,
which requires that the U.S. gasoline supply
contain specific volumes of renewable fuel
each calendar year, starting with 4 billion gal-
lons in 2006 and increasing to 7.5 billion in
-------
Clean Air—Objective 1.1: Healthier Outdoor Air
2012. Developing and implementing the
RFS program will require a substantial
investment of resources: expertise in renew-
able fuels (production, distribution, and
blending); vehicle testing to assess the
impacts of renewable fuels on emissions;
refinery modeling; transportation modeling
and life-cycleanalysis; consideration of energy
security impacts; and economic analyses
(including farm/agricultural impacts).
AIR Toxics
EPA regulates emis-
sions of 186 toxic air
pollutants, including diox-
in, asbestos, toluene, and
such metals as cadmium,
mercury, chromium, and
lead compounds.4 To com-
plement the national
standards that address
major stationary sources of
air toxics, we are conduct-
ing national, regional, and
community-based efforts to reduce multimedia
and cumulative risks. Characterizing emissions
and the risks they pose nationally and locally,
such as in Indian country, will require signifi-
cant effort. We will need to update the
science and keep the public informed about
these issues. Toxic pollutants are of particular
interest to the environmental justice commu-
nity because of the proximity of many
low-income and minority communities to
sources of toxic emissions, such as industrial
facilities, waste transfer stations, roadways,
and bus terminals. To better address areas that
may suffer disproportionately, EPA will use
tools and indicators to identify locations with
potential environmental justice concerns.
EPA will continue implementing the
Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), promul-
gated in May 2005, to permanently cap and
reduce mercury emissions from coal-fired
power plants. CAMR establishes standards of
performance that limit mercury emissions
from new and existing coal-fired power plants
and creates a market-based cap-and-trade
program that will reduce utility emissions of
mercury nationwide in two phases. The cap
for the first phase is 38 tons, and utilities can
take advantage of "co-benefit" reductions,
such as mercury reductions achieved by
reducing SO2 and NOX emissions under
CAIR. In the second phase, which begins in
2018, coal-fired power plants will be subject
to a second cap, which will ultimately reduce
emissions to 15 tons. Like
CAIR, the CAMR program has
stringent emissions monitoring
and reporting requirements
modeled after those of the Acid
Rain Program. The flexibility
of allowance trading creates
financial incentives to look for
new and low-cost ways to
reduce emissions and improve
the effectiveness of pollution
control equipment.
The Clean Air Act also
requires EPA to establish stan-
dards to reduce emissions of air
toxics from motor vehicles and their fuels. In
March 2006, EPA proposed standards to limit
the benzene content of gasoline and to
reduce emissions from passenger vehicles and
portable gasoline containers. EPA will finalize
this rule in 2007 and implement it in subse-
quent years.
EPA continues to develop and refine
tools, training, handbooks, and information
to assist our partners in characterizing risks
from air toxics, and we will work with them
on strategies for making local decisions to
reduce those risks. As EPA implements its
community-based air toxics programs, includ-
ing Community Action for a Renewed
Environment (CARE), we will evaluate how
program activities affect areas with potential
environmental justice issues. We will work
with affected communities to address risks
and track progress. We will use data from our
national toxics monitoring network and from
local assessments to better characterize risk
and assess priorities.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
WORKING WITH TRIBES AND
OTHER PARTNERS
To reduce risks and protect the health of
all people living in Indian country, EPA is
committed to working with tribes on a gov-
ernment-to-government basis to develop the
infrastructure and skills they need to assess,
understand, and control air quality on their
lands. In consultation with tribes, we will
establish needed federal regulatory authorities
consistent with EPA's Indian Policy, and we
will support tribal traditions and culture. We
will help tribes develop and manage their
own air programs, providing technical sup-
port, assistance in developing and analyzing
data, and opportunities to participate in plan-
ning and policy-setting at the regional and
national level. When tribes choose not to
develop their own programs, EPA will imple-
ment air quality programs directly. We will
continue to support air monitoring in Indian
country, and we are exploring opportunities
for mercury and other deposition monitoring.
EPA has developed new rules for new or
modified major and minor sources of air pol-
lution in Indian country, and we will work
with tribes to delegate or implement these
rules directly in all of Indian country.
As we develop and implement clean air
strategies, we will involve the public in
meaningful ways and work with other federal
agencies to ensure a coordinated approach.
Our federal partners include the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (in the areas of
animal feeding operations, agricultural burn-
ing, and controlled burning), the U.S.
Department of Transportation (for transporta-
tion-related air quality issues), the U.S.
Department of Energy (for electric utilities,
electricity generation, and energy efficiency
issues), and the U.S. Department of the
Interior (concerning visibility in national
parks and wilderness areas).
Effective partnerships are also key to our
sound science efforts. For example, we will
continue to collaborate with the U.S.
Department of Commerce's National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
to develop a consistent, national numerical
air quality model for short-term air quality
forecasts for ozone and PM. EPA will also
work with the international science commu-
nity to better understand the movement of
pollutants in and out of the United States
and to assess potential mitigation strategies.
Criteria air pollutants, such as ozone and
fine particles, as well as persistent bioaccumu-
lative toxins (PBTs), such as mercury,
dioxins, and polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs), can be transported across national
borders. EPA is also working with other agen-
cies and other governments to address this
transboundary pollution. We will work with
NOAA, the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, and other agencies to detect,
track, and forecast the effects of these air
pollutants from international sources. By
engaging with the international scientific
community, we hope to improve our under-
standing of international flows and our tools
for analyzing and evaluating response policies.
Working through bilateral agreements,
international partners, and multilateral
international organizations (such as the
United Nations Environment Program and
the Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development), we will promote capacity
building, technology transfer, and other strate-
gies to reduce foreign sources of pollution.
-------
Clean Air—Objective 1.2: Healthier Indoor Air
EPA will continue to lead the United
States in a variety of international partner-
ships and agreements:
• The Partnership for Clean Fuels and
Vehicles (www.unep.org/pcfv) is
working to phase out leaded gasoline
worldwide, to reduce sulfur in fuels, and
to adopt clean vehicle technologies.
• The Partnership for Clean Indoor Air
(www.pciaonline.org) is reducing the
health risks faced by the more than
2 billion people who burn biomass
fuels indoors for cooking and heating.
• The Convention on Long-Range
Transboundary Air Pollution
(www.unece.org/env/lrtap) and the
Stockholm Convention on Persistent
Organic Pollutants (www.pops.int)
are controlling sources of internation-
ally transported pollutants to protect
U.S. interests.
We will continue to work with Canada,
Mexico, and key stakeholders to manage air
quality along our common borders. Among
our existing agreements are the U.S.-Mexico
La Paz Agreement (http://air.utep.edu/bca/
jac/agreement.html), the U.S.-Canada Air
Quality Agreement (www.epa.gov/airmarkt/
usca/agreement.html), and the North
American Agreement on Environmental
Cooperation (www.naaec.gc.ca/eng/
agreement/agreement_e.htm).
OBJECTIVE 1.2: HEALTHIER INDOOR AIR
THROUGH 2012, WORKING WITH PARTNERS, REDUCE HUMAN HEALTH RISKS BY
REDUCING EXPOSURE TO INDOOR AIR CONTAMINANTS THROUGH THE PROMOTION OF
VOLUNTARY ACTIONS BY THE PUBLIC.
Sub-objective 1.2.1: Radon. By 2012, the
number of future premature lung cancer
deaths prevented annually through lowered
radon exposure will increase to 1,250 from
the 1997 baseline of 285 future premature
lung cancer deaths prevented.
Sub-objective 1.2.2: Asthma. By 2012, the
number of people taking all essential actions
to reduce exposure to indoor environmental
asthma triggers will increase to 6.5 million
from the 2003 baseline of 3 million. EPA will
place special emphasis on children and other
disproportionately impacted populations.
Sub-objective 1.2.3: Schools. By 2012, the
number of schools implementing an effective
indoor air quality management plan will
increase to 40,000 from the 2002 baseline of
25,000.
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
ACHIEVING HEALTHIER INDOOR AIR
Air inside homes, schools, and work-
places can be more polluted than outdoor air
in the largest and most industrialized cities.5
Given that people typically spend close to
90 percent of their time indoors,6 many of us
may be more at risk from indoor than from
outdoor air pollution. Moreover, people who
are apt to spend the most time indoors—
children, the elderly, and the chronically ill,
especially those suffering from respiratory or
cardiovascular disease—may be those most
susceptible to indoor air pollutants. EPA is
also concerned about minority, low-income,
or other populations that may be facing dis-
proportionate risks from indoor air pollution,
such as secondhand tobacco smoke and other
asthma triggers.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
To improve
indoor air qual-
ity, EPA relies
on innovative,
non-regulatory
outreach and
partnership
programs that
inform and
educate the
public about
indoor air qual-
ity concerns,
such as radon,
and actions
they can take
to reduce
potential risks
in homes,
schools, and workplaces. We collaborate with
groups such as health care providers in urban
areas, who treat children prone to or suffering
disproportionately from asthma attacks; school
personnel, who manage school environments;
county and local environmental health offi-
cials; and housing and building organizations.
To support these partnerships, we provide poli-
cy and technical recommendations based on
the most current science available.
EPA will provide tools and technical
assistance as requested to assist tribes in col-
lecting data on indoor pollutants, such as
radon and mold, as well as environmental
triggers of asthma. This data will help tribal
communities assess the pervasiveness of
indoor air quality problems and develop a
baseline from which to measure success in
improving indoor air, including the accom-
plishments and benefits provided by such
programs as Tribal Effective Asthma
Management (www.epa.gov/region08/
air/iaq/asthma/asthma.html#2) and Tools
for Schools (www.epa.gov/iaq/schools/
index.html). We will work with other federal
agencies to provide guidance and assistance
on reducing these contaminants in all Indian
communities. Through the State Indoor
Radon Grant Program, we will continue to
help states and tribes develop and implement
effective radon assessment and mitigation
programs.
OBJECTIVE 1.3: PROTECT THE OZONE LAYER
BY 2011, TOTAL EFFECTIVE EQUIVALENT STRATOSPHERIC CHLORINE WILL HAVE
REACHED ITS PEAK AND BEGUN ITS GRADUAL DECLINE TO A VALUE LESS THAN 3.4
PARTS PER BILLION OF AIR BY VOLUME.
Strategic Targets
By 2015, reduce U.S. consumption of
Class II ozone-depleting substances to
less than 1,520 tons per year of ozone
depleting potential from the 2003
baseline of 9,900 tons per year.
By 2165, reduce the incidence of
melanoma skin cancer to 14 new skin
cancer cases avoided per 100,000
people from the 1990 baseline of 13.8
cases avoided per 100,000 people.
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER
Scientific evidence amassed over the past
3 decades has shown that chlorofluorocarbons
and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (used as refrig-
erants, solvents, and for other purposes),
halons, (fire-extinguishing agents), methyl
bromide (a pesticide), and other halogenated
chemicals used around the world are depleting
the stratospheric ozone layer. As a result, more
harmful ultraviolet (UV) radiation is reaching
-------
Clean Air—Objective 1.4: Radiation
the earth,7 increasing the risk of overexposure
and consequent health effects, including skin
cancer, cataracts, and other illnesses. More
than a million new cases of skin cancer are
diagnosed each year;8 1 in 5 Americans is
expected to experience skin cancer; and more
than half of all Americans develop cataracts
by the time they are 80 years old.9
As a signatory to the Montreal Protocol on
Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer,10 the
United States regulates and enforces
Montreal Protocol provisions domestically. In
accordance with this international treaty and
related Clean Air Act requirements,11 EPA
will continue implementing domestic pro-
grams to reduce and control ozone-depleting
substances (ODS) and enforcing rules on
their production, import, and emission. Our
approach combines market-based efforts with
sector-specific technology guidelines to
facilitate alternatives to hydrochlorofluoro-
carbons. We will work in partnership with
stakeholders to smooth the transition to ODS
substitutes that reduce greenhouse gas emis-
sions and save energy and act on 100 percent
of the petitions for substitutes within 90 days
of receipt. To help reduce emissions interna-
tionally, we will assist in transferring
technology to developing countries and work
with them to accelerate the phase-out of
ODS. We estimate that from 1990 to
2165, worldwide phase-out of ODS will save
6.3 million lives from fatal skin cancer, avoid
299 million cases of nonfatal skin cancers,
and avoid 27.5 million cases of cataracts in
the United States alone.12
Because the ozone layer is not expected
to recover until the middle of this century at
the earliest,13 the public will continue to be
exposed to high levels of UV radiation.14 To
address this concern, we will continue educa-
tion and outreach efforts to encourage school
children and their caregivers to change their
behavior to reduce UV-related health risks.
The SunWise program (www.epa.gov/
sunwise/), which we expect to grow from 200
participating kindergarten-grade 8 schools in
2000 to 20,000 by 2011, will teach thousands
of school children and adults how to protect
themselves from overexposure to the sun.
OBJECTIVE 1.4: RADIATION
THROUGH 2011, WORKING WITH PARTNERS, MINIMIZE UNNECESSARY RELEASES OF
RADIATION AND BE PREPARED TO MINIMIZE IMPACTS TO HUMAN HEALTH AND THE
ENVIRONMENT SHOULD UNWANTED RELEASES OCCUR.
Strategic Targets
By 2011, 77 percent of the U.S. land
area will be covered by the RadNet
ambient radiation air monitoring sys-
tem. (2001 baseline is 35 percent of
the U.S. land area.)
• By 2011, the radiation program will
maintain a 90 percent level of readi-
ness of radiation program personnel
and assets to support federal radiolog-
ical emergency response and recovery
operations. (2005 baseline is a 50 per-
cent level of readiness.)
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
MINIMIZING RELEASES OF RADIATION
AND RELATED IMPACTS
EPA continues to meet statutory man-
dates for managing radiation waste and
controlling radioactive emissions and to fulfill
its responsibilities under presidential decision
directives for radiological emergency pre-
paredness and response. These responsibilities
form the core of our strategy to protect the
public and the environment from unnecessary
exposure to radiation. We will work with
states, tribes, and industry to develop innova-
tive training, public information, and
partnership programs to minimize these expo-
sures. We will also
conduct radiation-
risk assessments to
evaluate health
risks from radiation
exposure; determine
appropriate levels
for cleaning up con-
taminated sites; and
develop radiation
protection and risk
management policy,
guidance, and rules.
Mining and
processing naturally
radioactive materi-
als for use in
medicine, power
generation, consumer products, and industry
inevitably generate emissions and waste. EPA
will provide guidance and training to help
federal and state agencies prepare for
emergencies at U.S. nuclear plants, trans-
portation accidents involving shipments of
radioactive materials, and acts of nuclear
terrorism. EPA will also develop guidance for
cleaning up radioactively-contaminated
Superfund sites. To manage radioactive
releases and exposures, we will conduct
health-risk site assessments; risk modeling,
cleanup, and waste management activities;
voluntary programs to minimize exposure to
radiation in commercial products and indus-
trial applications; national radiation
monitoring; and radiological emergency
response.
In response to state and local organiza-
tions, EPA will continue to provide advice
and guidance to help locate, identify, and
dispose of radioactive sources that find their
way into non-nuclear facilities, particularly
scrap yards, steel mills, and municipal waste
disposal facilities. We will work with the
International Atomic Energy Agency and
other federal agencies to prevent metals
and finished products suspected of having
radioactive contamination from entering the
country. Through partnerships with states,
local agencies,
and tribes we
will locate and
secure lost,
stolen, or aban-
doned
radioactive
sources within
the United
States and inves-
tigate and
promote prac-
tices to reduce
industrial
radioactive
releases. We will
expand our
ongoing efforts
to ensure that tribes receive assistance in
dealing with radon exposures in their homes
and schools.
One of EPA's major responsibilities relat-
ed to radiation is certifying that all
radioactive waste shipped by the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) to the Waste
Isolation Pilot Plant is disposed of safely and
according to EPA's standards. We inspect
waste generator facilities and biennially eval-
uate DOE's compliance with applicable
environmental laws and regulations.
-------
Clean Air—Objective 1.5: Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions
OBJECTIVE 1.5: REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
BY 2012, 160 MILLION METRIC TONS OF CARBON EQUIVALENT (MMTCE) OF
EMISSIONS WILL BE REDUCED THROUGH EPA'S VOLUNTARY CLIMATE PROTECTION
PROGRAMS.15
Sub-objective 1.5.1: Buildings Sector. By
2012, 46 MMTCE will be reduced in the
buildings sector (compared to the 2002 level).
Sub-objective 1.5.2: Industry Sector. By
2012, 99 MMTCE will be reduced in the
industry sector (compared to the 2002 level).
Sub-objective 1.5.3: Transportation Sector.
By 2012, 15 MMTCE will be reduced in the
transportation sector (compared to the
2002 level).
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR REDUCING
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
In 2002, the President announced a U.S.
climate policy to reduce greenhouse gas
(GHG) intensity by 18 percent over the next
decade. EPA's strategy for helping to achieve
this goal is to collaborate with private and
public organizations to reduce GHG intensity
while providing additional benefits, from
cleaner air to lower energy bills. At the core
of these efforts are government-industry part-
nership programs designed to encourage
consumers, businesses, and organizations to
make sound investments in energy efficient
equipment, policies and practices, and trans-
portation choices.
EPA is collaborating with other federal
agencies to maximize results under our cli-
mate protection programs. In addition to
reducing greenhouse gas emissions and sup-
porting such EPA goals as clean air, these
programs can help other agencies achieve
their strategic goals. For example, EPA and
the Department of Energy (DOE) jointly
implement the ENERGY STAR Program to
ENERGY STAR
promote energy-
efficient products
and practices
(www.energystar.gov).
Not only does
ENERGY STAR
support EPA's objec-
tive to reduce GHG
emissions from
homes, businesses,
and industry, it also
supports DOE's goal to cost-effectively
improve energy efficiency (DOE Strategic
Theme 1: Energy Security). ENERGY STAR
can also help make housing more affordable
by delivering energy savings to low-income
and subsidized areas. We are coordinating our
ENERGY STAR marketplace activities with
DOE's research and development, regulatory
activities, and technology demonstrations,
and we are using complementary measures of
our progress in the buildings sector.
We will also continue collaborating with
DOE through EPA's SmartWay Transport
Partnership, which works with fleets and the
trucking and railroad industries to promote
energy-efficient strategies, such as reducing
idling, using low-carbon fuels like E85 and
biodiesel, and reducing PM and NOX emis-
sions (www.epa.gov/smartway). SmartWay
also supports DOE's goals for increasing ener-
gy diversity and cost-effectively improving
energy efficiency (DOE Strategic Theme 1:
Energy Security). To promote efficient,
energy-saving technologies that reduce GHG,
NOX, and PM, we are working together to:
• Increase the number of filling stations
that offer E85 ethanol by leveraging
market forces, tax incentives, regula-
tions, and state and local efforts.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
Promote idling control technologies,
such as plug-in electric power at
truck stops and auxiliary power units,
which can save fuel and eliminate
associated emissions.
Develop protocols for measuring heavy
duty truck fuel efficiency, allowing
transporters to choose fuel-efficient
trucks and increase fuel savings.
To assess progress under these joint
efforts, EPA is working with other federal
agencies to adopt complementary measures
of performance. In one pilot effort, for exam-
ple, EPA and DOE will be working jointly to
promote idling technologies that will save
fuel and to add new fueling stations offering
E85 ethanol.
EPA will be managing a number of other
partnership efforts to inform the marketplace
and more quickly deploy technology in the
residential, commercial, and transportation
sectors:
• Partnerships with the energy, indus-
trial, and agricultural sectors to
promote technologies and practices
for reducing methane and other
potent GHGs (www.epa.gov/nonco2/
voluntaryprograms.html).
• The Green Power, Combined Heat
and Power, and other partnerships to
encourage developing and purchasing
clean and renewable energy
(http://epa.gov/cleanenergy).
• The Best Workplaces for Commuters
Program to benefit commuters and
reduce vehicle trips and miles trav-
eled (www.commuterchoice.gov).
• Climate Leaders, an EPA-industry-
government partnership to develop
long-term comprehensive climate
change strategies and set corporate-
wide goals for reducing GHGs
(www.epa.gov/climateleaders).
• The Clean Energy-Environment
State Partnership to support states in
increasing the use of clean energy
(www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/
stateandlocal/partnership.htm).
EPA also promotes international part-
nerships to reduce GHGs and deploy clean
technologies. Through the Methane to
Markets Partnership, we will work with
other countries and the U.S. private sector
to reduce global methane emissions,
enhance economic growth, promote energy
security, and improve the environment by
using cost-effective methane recovery tech-
nologies (www.methanetomarkets.org). In
addition, the United States has joined
Australia, China, India, Japan, and South
Korea in the Asia-Pacific Partnership on
Clean Development and Climate
(www.asiapacificpartnership.org), which will
advance the President's goal for cleaner and
more efficient technologies and practices.
We will also continue to develop and
assess innovative technologies for achieving
clean air. We will continue to develop
advanced clean and fuel-efficient automotive
technology. We will collaborate with our
private-sector partners to promote the
transfer of technologies to help meet the
more demanding size, performance, durability,
and towing requirements of sport utility and
urban delivery vehicles without compromis-
ing performance, safety, or reductions in
emissions. We will also promote renewable fuel
blends with the greatest environmental bene-
fits to maximize their potential for reducing
GHG intensity and improving air quality.
-------
Clean Air—Objective 1.6: Enhance Science and Research
OBJECTIVE 1.6: ENHANCE SCIENCE AND RESEARCH
THROUGH 2012, PROVIDE SOUND SCIENCE TO SUPPORT EPA's GOAL OF CLEAN AIR BY
CONDUCTING LEADING-EDGE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPING A BETTER UNDERSTANDING
AND CHARACTERIZATION OF HUMAN HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL OUTCOMES.
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
ENHANCING SCIENCE AND RESEARCH
EPA's Air Research Program provides
information we need to set and implement
NAAQS and to ensure that residual risks
associated with exposure to hazardous air pol-
lutants (air toxics) are being reduced. We
conduct research at EPA laboratories, through
extramural grants (including five Particulate
Matter Research Centers), and by co-funded
partnerships (for instance, with the National
Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
and the Health Effects Institute [HEI]).
We are targeting our air research to
achieve measurable improvements in two
areas: reducing uncertainty in the science that
supports us in setting air standards and reduc-
ing uncertainty about the effects of air
pollutants on human health. To achieve these
goals, our air research program will focus on:
Developing data and tools to support NAAQS.
EPA research will provide new and updated
data and new methods and models to charac-
terize and estimate source emissions.
Enhanced air quality models that more accu-
rately reflect meteorological effects and
improve our ability to forecast air quality
changes will enable EPA, states, and tribes to
alert the public to air quality concerns.
Advances in receptor-based models will more
accurately identify which source categories
contribute to ambient concentrations,
enabling us to target control strategies.
Research will also investigate technologies
for addressing multiple pollutants from key
sources contributing to non-attainment or air
toxics problems. We will also be developing a
framework for assessing the impact of
regulatory measures in improving air quality
and environmental and human health.
Understanding the effects of air pollution
on health. With HEI and other research part-
ners, we are undertaking a systematic
evaluation of PM attributes that will help us
understand how exposure to PM and related
air toxics can affect various aspects of health,
including pulmonary, cardiovascular,
immunological, neurological, reproductive,
and developmental health, and we will focus
particularly on susceptible populations.
Linking sources and effects. Research will
enable us to link health effects more closely
to specific sources and PM attributes, advanc-
ing the state of air pollution science and
allowing us to better target sources of greatest
impact and improve control measures and
strategies to minimize the impact of particle
and air toxics emissions. This will be the
major theme of the Particulate Matter
Centers' 5-year program.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
HUMAN CAPITAL
EPA has been successful in recruiting and
retaining talented staff with the scientific and
technical backgrounds we need in several
areas. For example, the EPA National Vehicle
and Fuel Emissions Laboratory and the Clean
Air Technology program have attracted high
quality engineers and scientists.
However, EPA faces a shortage of staff
skills to implement new air program require-
ments, such as CAIR and the Energy Policy
Act of 2005. For example, to implement
CAIR we will need to develop the workforce
skills to support emissions measurement,
engineering technology, environmental
assessment, and computer database develop-
ment and administration. Similarly, to
develop a national renewable fuel standard
and promulgate regulations to implement it,
EPA will need staff with expertise in renew-
able fuels, vehicle testing, refinery modeling,
transportation modeling and life-cycle analy-
sis, energy security impacts, and economic
analysis. The recruiting strategy we will use to
address these gaps includes cooperative agree-
ments with several top engineering colleges.
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
EPA has made great strides in developing
measures that focus on the environmental
results of our clean air and global climate
change work. Our strategic targets directly
track and measure our annual performance
goals (APGs), estab-
lished in EPA's
Annual Plan and
Budget and reported
on in our annual
Performance and
Accountability Report.
For instance, the
APGs for reductions
in the population-
weighted ambient
concentration of
ozone and PM2.5 pro-
grams set annual
targets based on our
strategic targets. We have also developed
annual measures that directly track strategic
targets for the number of people taking all
essential actions to reduce exposure to indoor
environmental asthma and the number of
schools implementing effective indoor air
quality management plans.
To track our annual progress toward our
research objectives, we will use a number of
objective measures of customer satisfaction,
product impact and quality, and efficiency.
For example, we rely on independent expert
review panel ratings,
client surveys on the
usefulness of our
products, and analy-
ses demonstrating
the actual use of EPA
research products.
We have aligned
our strategic and
annual measures with
environmental indi-
cators to be included
in EPA's forthcoming
2007 Report on the
Environment.
Environmental indicators reflected in this
2006-20J J Strategic Plan include trends of
national ambient concentrations and emis-
sions of criteria air pollutants (and their
precursors, such as ozone and fine particulate
matter), mercury point-source emissions,
-------
Clean Air—Using Feedback from Performance Assessments and Program Evaluations
ambient levels of stratospheric chlorine
(which can deplete the ozone layer), and
greenhouse gas emissions.
We have also included as strategic targets
all of the clean air and global climate change
long-term, outcome-oriented measures devel-
oped through Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) Program Assessment Rating
Tool (PART) assessments. These targets include
the population-weighted ambient concentration
targets for ozone and PM2 5, and the toxicity-
weighted risk reduction goals for air toxics.
IMPROVING PERFORMANCE
MEASUREMENT
As we developed this 2006-2011 Strategic
Plan, we examined some of the longer-term
opportunities to improve our measures of
environmental outcomes for the future. We
are continuing our work to develop long-term
measures that capture the environmental bene-
fits of the air and climate change programs, for
example, by measuring the benefits of reduced
ultraviolet exposure on human health directly.
USING FEEDBACK FROM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS
AND PROGRAM EVALUATIONS
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY PROGRAM
In the PART evaluation of the Acid Rain
Program, OMB recommended that EPA work
to: (1) overcome statutory limitations that set
maximum emission reduction targets and
limit the scope of emissions trading and pro-
gram benefits; and (2) develop efficiency
measures based on the full cost of the pro-
gram. We have addressed the first
recommendation by promulgating CAIR,
which is projected to reduce SO2 and NOX
emissions beyond Title IV and uses a cap-
and-trade approach modeled after the Acid
Rain Program. We are addressing the second
recommendation by developing data and
methods to support efficiency measures that
reflect industry and EPA costs.
The National Academy of Sciences eval-
uated the nation's air quality management
system16 and concluded that while emitted
pollutants have been substantially reduced
over the past 30 years, further progress is
hindered by scientific and technical limita-
tions in the current system. To address some
of these issues, EPA is: (1) developing air
quality-ecosystem indicators for the future
tracking of trends in human exposure and
ecological condition; (2) exploring opportu-
nities to co-locate ambient air monitoring
and atmospheric deposition monitoring with
long-term ecological research study sites; and
(3) improving methods for monitoring atmos-
pheric inputs to ecosystems, such as ambient
mercury concentrations and mercury deposi-
tion. We are also developing and expanding
the use of high-order health and ecological
indicators and characterizing the movement of
air pollutants through ecosystems over time.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
INDOOR AIR
OMB's PART assessment has led our
Indoor Air Program to better quantify the
relationship between funding levels and
results, improve transparency by making state
radon grantee performance data more accessi-
ble to the public, and improve the program's
efficiency measures to more clearly demon-
strate cost effectiveness.
MOBILE SOURCE-CLEAN AIR
TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
As a result of a 2005 PART evaluation,
the Clean Air Technology (CAT) program is
developing better performance measures that
more clearly link program efforts to green-
house gas reduction potential.
RESEARCH
In 2005, the Board of Scientific
Counselors (BOSC) evaluated the
Particulate Matter and Ozone Research
Program and recommended developing
long-term measures as well as periodic
assessment of customer satisfaction.
Recommendations were incorporated
into the 2005 PART evaluation of the
NAAQS Research Program.
A committee of air pollution experts
formed under the National Research
Council completed a series of reports in
2004 and made three specific recommenda-
tions concerning the management of
scientific research:
• EPA should work toward a higher
level of sustained integration and
interaction among the scientific dis-
ciplines and among the full range of
public and private research funding
organizations.
• Research is needed to develop
stronger tools to compile and synthe-
size the large amounts of new
information being developed in this
research program.
• Sustained and substantially enhanced
management of this program by EPA,
accompanied by a continuing mecha-
nism for independent review and
oversight of the program, will be the
only way to ensure that this invest-
ment is being soundly made.
EPA will include actions and milestones
to address these recommendations, as well as
recommendations on air research that we
received from BOSC and PART assessments,
in our revised multiyear plan for air research.
-------
Clean Air—Emerging Issues and External Factors
EMERGING ISSUES AND EXTERNAL FACTORS
The current, fundamental imbalance
between energy supply and energy demand,
and the effect of that imbalance on the econ-
omy, is debatably the most significant
environmental issue that has emerged since
EPA developed our 2003-2008 Strategic Plan.
Concerns around energy supply, economic
prosperity, national security, and the environ-
ment present unprecedented opportunities for
technological innovation in the marketplace.
Higher, more volatile energy prices could
create pressures affecting air quality programs
and goals. EPA will need to ensure that renew-
able fuels programs, such as those required
under the Energy Policy Act of 2005, are
implemented smoothly. Increases in energy
prices and the turnover of capital stock in the
energy sector will provoke interest in new
and more efficient technologies—many of
which could improve air quality. EPA will
need to work with industry to develop and
deploy these technologies in all economic
sectors, including transportation and electric-
ity production and end-use. For example,
as demand for domestic coal resources
increases, EPA will work with the U.S.
Department of Energy, coal producers, and
others to promote development and market-
ing of new coal technologies that generate
extremely low air emissions, such as inte-
grated gasification combined cycle (or, more
broadly, coal gasification with carbon
capture and sequestration).
We face another challenge in the rising
level of emissions that originate in other
countries, threatening progress in the United
States and affecting our ability to achieve our
public health and environmental standards.
The effects of international and interconti-
nental transport are already apparent, and as
energy use and development rapidly increase
in Asia and other regions, the United States
may feel the impact. Decreasing emissions in
developing countries will not replace the
need for reducing air pollution emissions
within the United States. Rather, interna-
tional efforts will complement our local and
regional control efforts to protect public
health and our domestic investments. Thus,
to achieve our own domestic goals, we will
need to better understand sources of pollution
in other countries and work cooperatively to
decrease these emissions.
Recent scientific studies indicate that the
stratospheric ozone layer is likely to take
longer to heal than previously anticipated.17
Therefore, we expect more people to be
exposed to excess UV radiation over a longer
period. Timely, comprehensive action by all
nations, including the United States, will be
more important than ever to restore the
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
ozone layer and protect people from skin
cancer, cataracts, and other illnesses.
A number of external factors could
affect achievement of our strategic goals. We
rely on state, tribal, and local government
programs to meet many of our clean air per-
formance targets; however, reduced budgets
and resource constraints could impede their
progress. Lawsuits and court action may
require EPA to adjust schedules and could
delay achievement of critical milestones.
Economic conditions and development pat-
terns in the United States and the world and
evolving energy and transportation policies
could also affect our ability to attain our
objectives for clean air and climate change.
Finally, weather conditions and meteoro-
logical patterns have a very important effect
on air quality. For example, high tempera-
tures and bright sunlight can increase the
formation of ozone. Wind can carry air
pollution from one area to another, while
conditions of little or no wind can cause air
pollutants to remain in an area and build up
to unhealthy levels. We must also consider
these factors as we develop and implement
plans and strategies for achieving and main-
taining clean air.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/ocfo/
futures/perspectives.htm.
NOTES:
1. U.S. EPA. March 2006. Air Emissions Trends—Continued Progress Through 2005. Available online at
www.epa.gov/airtrends/2006/econ-emissions.html: EPA Office of Air and Radiation Web Site.
Access: April 26, 2006.
2. Use of the terms "Indian country," "Indian lands," "tribal lands," "tribal waters," and "tribal areas" within this
Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is
their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs.
3. Ibid.
4. Clean Air Act, Title I, Section 112. Available online at: www.epa.gov/air/caa/caall2.txt: EPA Clean Air Act
Web Site. Access: April 26, 2006.
5. U.S. EPA. 1987. The Total Exposure Assessment Methodology (TEAM) Study: Summary and Analysis:
Volume I. EPA 600-6-87-002a. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
6. U.S. EPA. 1989. Report to Congress on Indoor Air Quality, Volume 11: Assessment and Control of Indoor Air
Pollution. EPA 400-1-89-001C. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
7. United Nations Environment Programme. 2002. Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion. Available online at:
http://ozone.unep.org/Publications/6v_science%20assess%20panel.asp: UNEP, The Ozone Secretariat Web Site.
Date of Access: April 26, 2006.
8. American Cancer Society Inc. 2006. Cancer Facts and Figures: 2006. No. 500806. Available online at
www.cancer.org. Access: April 26, 2006.
-------
Clean Air—Notes
9. Prevent Blindness America. 2003. Cataract Fact Sheet, FS32. Available online at:
www.preventblindness.org/resources/factsheets/CataractsFS32.PDF. Access: April 26, 2006.
10. United Nations Environment Programme. The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, as
adjusted Beijing 1999. Nairobi, Kenya. Available online at http://ozone.unep.org/pdfs/
Montreal-Protocol2000.pdf: UNEP, The Ozone Secretariat Web Site. Access: April 26, 2006.
11. Clean Air Act, Title VI. Available online at: www.epa.gov/air/caa/title6.html: EPA Clean Air Act Web Site.
Access: April 26, 2006.
12. U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Radiation. 1999. The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act 1990-2010, EPA Report
to Congress. EPA-410-R-99-001. Washington, DC: GPO. Available online at
http://www.epa.gov/air/sect812/1990-2010/chapll30.pdf. Access: April 26, 2006.
13. United Nations Environment Programme. 2002. Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion. Available online at
http://ozone.unep.org/Publications/6v_science%20assess%20panel.asp: UNEP, The Ozone Secretariat Web Site.
Access: April 26, 2006.
14. UV irradiance has increased since the early 1980s by 6 to 14 percent at more than 10 sites distributed over
mid- and high latitudes of both hemispheres. Information from: United Nations Environment Programme.
2002. Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion. Available online at http://ozone.unep.org/Publications/
6v_science%20assess%20panel.asp: UNEP, The Ozone Secretariat Web Site. Access: April 26, 2006.
15. EPA's climate protection programs contribute to the President's 18 percent GHG emissions intensity reduction
goal for 2012. The goal requires prevention of more than 100 MMTCE nationwide in 2012 in addition to the
business-as-usual savings that are expected to occur. Of the 103 MMTCE that EPA programs achieve, 80
MMTCE, or about 80 percent, count towards that approximate 100 MMTCE increment. The remaining reduc-
tions will come from other programs and initiatives. For more information see www.whitehouse.gov/news/
releases/2002/02/climatechange.html.
16. National Research Council of the National Academies. 2004. Air Quality Management in the United States.
Available online at: http://fermat.nap.edu/books/0309089328/html. Access: April 26, 2006.
17. New York Times, December 7, 2005, Scientists Say Recovery of the Ozone Layer may take Longer Than
Expected, Kenneth Chang. Available online at: www.nytimes.com/2005/12/07/science/
07ozone.html?ex= 1291611600&en=6e8ca9c8549a6f6b&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss.
Access: April 26, 2006.
-------
£
-------
Clean and Safe
Water
Ensure drinking water is safe.
Restore and maintain oceans, water-
sheds, and their aquatic ecosystems
to protect human health, support
economic and recreational activities,
and provide healthy habitat for fish,
plants, and wildlife.
««&:.
-------
This "Clean and Safe Water" goal defines the improvements that EPA
expects to see in the quality of the nation's drinking water and of
surface waters over the next 5 years. These goals include improving
compliance with drinking water standards, maintaining safe water quality
at public beaches, restoring more than 2,000 polluted waterbodies, and
improving the health of coastal waters.
Three key strategies will drive progress toward these clean and safe
water goals:
• Core Programs: Continue effective implementation of core national
water programs, giving priority to improving water quality monitoring
and information management, as well as working with state partners
to strengthen water quality standards, improve discharge permits, and reduce pollution from diffuse or
"nonpoint" sources,
• Water Infrastructure: Help sustain and secure the network of pipes and treatment facilities that
constitute the nation's water infrastructure through investments in State Revolving Loan funds,
pursuit of innovative financing, local adoption of sustainable management practices, and an
increased commitment to water efficiency as well as partnerships and technical assistance to
enhance the abilities of utilities to plan for, prevent, detect, and respond to security threats,
• Watershed Restoration and Protection: Apply a watershed approach to restoring polluted waters
across the country, including developing Total Maximum Daily Loads, implementing clean-up
plans on a watershed basis, and promoting innovative, cost-effective practices like water quality
trading and watershed permitting to restore and protect water quality.
Benjamin H. Grumbles
Assistant Administrator
Office of Water
34
-------
r>! N
Clean a
ater
Since the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water
Acts were enacted over 3 decades ago, government,
citizens, and the private sector have worked together
to make dramatic progress in improving the quality of
surface water and drinking water.
Thirty years ago, many of the nation's
drinking water systems provided water
to the tap with very limited treatment.
Drinking water was too often the cause
of illnesses linked to microbiological
and other contaminants. Today, drink-
ing water systems monitor the quality
of the water they provide and treat
water to ensure compliance with stan-
dards covering a wide range of
contaminants. In addition, efforts to
protect waters that are sources of drinking water are
helping to keep drinking water safe.
Thirty years ago, about two-thirds of the surface
waters assessed by states were not attaining basic water
quality goals and were considered polluted.1 Some of the
nation's rivers were open sewers posing health risks, and
many water bodies were so polluted that swimming, fish-
ing, and recreation were impossible. Today, the number
of polluted waters has been dramatically reduced, and
many clean waters are getting even healthier. A massive
investment of federal, state, and local funds has resulted
in a new generation of sewage treatment. More than 50
industrial sectors now comply with nationally consistent
discharge regulations. In addition, sustained efforts to
implement best management practices have helped reduce
runoff of pollutants from diffuse, or "nonpoint," sources.
OBJECTIVES
Objective 2.1: Protect
Human Health 36
Objective22: Protect Water
Objective 2.3: Enhance
Science and Research .
Cleaner, safer water has renewed
recreational, ecological, and economic
interests in communities across the
nation. The recreation, tourism, and
travel industry is one of the largest
employers in the country, and a signifi-
cant portion of recreational spending
comes from swimming, boating, sport
fishing, and hunting.2 In addition, each
year, more than 180 million people
visit beaches for recreation.3
The dramatic restoration of some of the nation's
most polluted waters has paid large dividends in
enhanced recreation, healthier fisheries, and stronger
local economies. Many of the nation's best-known
water pollution problem areas are showing the results
of years of restoration efforts. The Cuyahoga River,
once so polluted that it caught fire, is now busy with
boats and harbor businesses. Oregon's Willamette
River has been restored to provide swimming, fishing,
and water sports. In Boston, the Charles River, once
badly polluted, increasingly supports boating and
related recreation.
35
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
Despite numerous improvements in the
quality of water, serious water pollution and
drinking water problems remain in certain areas.
Population growth continues to generate higher
levels of water pollution and places greater
demand on drinking water systems. Continued
progress toward clean waters and safer drinking
water will require that the country maintain its
commitment to the core programs that have
proven so effective in the past and implement
partnership approaches to improve water quality
and protect human health.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/water/.
OBJECTIVE 2.1: PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH
PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH BY REDUCING EXPOSURE TO CONTAMINANTS IN DRINKING
WATER (INCLUDING PROTECTING SOURCE WATERS), IN FISH AND SHELLFISH, AND IN
RECREATIONAL WATERS.
Sub-objective 2.1.1: Water Safe to Drink.
By 2011, 91 percent of the population served
by community water systems will receive drink-
ing water that meets all applicable health-based
drinking water standards through approaches
including effective treatment and source
water protection. (2005 baseline: 89 percent.)
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, 90 percent of community
water systems will provide drinking
water that meets all applicable
health-based drinking water standards
through approaches including
effective treatment and source water
protection. (2005 baseline: 89
percent.)
• By 2011, community water systems
will provide drinking water that
meets all applicable health-based
drinking water standards during 96
percent of person months (i.e., all
persons served by community water
systems times 12 months). (2005
baseline: 95.2 percent.)
• By 2011, 86 percent of the popula-
tion in Indian country4 served by
community water systems will receive
drinking water that meets all applica-
ble health-based drinking water
standards. (2005 baseline: 86 percent.)
• By 2011, minimize risk to public
health through source water protec-
tion for 50 percent of community
water systems and for the associated
62 percent of the population served
by community water systems (i.e.,
"minimized risk" achieved by substan-
tial implementation, as determined by
the state, of actions in a source water
protection strategy). (2005 baseline: 20
percent of community water systems;
28 percent of population.)
• By 2015, in coordination with other
federal agencies, reduce by 50 percent
-------
Clean and Safe Water—Objective 2.1: Protect Human Health
the number of homes on tribal lands5
lacking access to safe drinking water.
(2003 baseline: Indian Health
Service data indicate that 12 percent
of homes on tribal lands lack access
to safe drinking water [i.e., 38,637
homes lack access].)
Sub-objective 2.1.2: Fish and Shellfish Safe
to Eat. By 2011, reduce public health risk
and allow increased consumption of fish
and shellfish, as measured by the following
strategic targets:
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, reduce the percentage of
women of childbearing age having
mercury levels in blood above the
level of concern to 4.6 percent. (2002
baseline: 5.7 percent of women of
childbearing age have mercury blood
levels above levels of concern identi-
fied by the National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey
[NHANES].)
• By 2011, maintain or improve the
percentage of state-monitored shell-
fish-growing acres impacted by
anthropogenic sources that are
approved or conditionally approved
for use. (2003 baseline: 65 to 85 per-
cent of the 16.3 million acres of
state-monitored shellfish-growing
acres estimated to be impacted by
anthropogenic sources are approved
or conditionally approved for use.)
Sub-objective 2.1.3: Water Safe for
Swimming. By 2011, improve the quality of
recreational waters as measured by the
following strategic targets:
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, the number of waterborne
disease outbreaks attributable to
swimming in or other recreational
contact with coastal and Great Lakes
waters will be maintained at 2, meas-
ured as a 5-year average. (2005
baseline: An annual average of two
recreational contact waterborne dis-
ease outbreaks reported per year by
the Centers for Disease Control over
the years 1998 to 2002, adjusted to
remove outbreaks associated with
waters other than coastal and
Great Lakes waters and other than
natural surface waters [i.e., pools and
water parks].)
By 2011, maintain the percentage of
days of the beach season that coastal
and Great Lakes beaches monitored
by state beach safety programs are
open and safe for swimming at 96
percent. (2005 baseline: Beaches
open 96 percent of the 743,036 days
of the beach season [i.e., beach sea-
son days are equal to 4,025 beaches
multiplied by variable number of days
of beach season at each beach].)
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH
WATER SAFE TO DRINK
More than 280 million Americans count
on the safety of tap water provided by their
local water systems. EPA's strategy for ensur-
ing safe drinking water includes developing
and implementing drinking water standards,
supporting infrastructure, protecting waters
that are a source of drinking water, strength-
ening the security of water systems, and
improving access to safe drinking water
on tribal lands.
Drinking Water Standards
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
directs EPA to establish national standards
for contaminants in drinking water provided
to consumers by water systems. EPA sets
standards based on sound science and rigor-
ous technical and economic analyses.
To date, EPA has established standards for
91 contaminants.
Over the next several years, EPA will
conduct the second 6-year National Primary
Drinking Water Rule Review to help deter-
mine whether existing standards need to be
revised. We will also continue to assess the
need for new drinking water standards.
Guided by recommendations from the
National Research Council, the National
Drinking Water Advisory Council, and other
stakeholders, we will evaluate data on health
effects and the risk of exposure to various
contaminants; gather information on tech-
nologies that prevent, detect, and remove
contaminants; and evaluate compliance costs.
Ensuring Compliance
We will work closely with states (49 of
which have primary enforcement authority
for health-based standards under SDWA),
tribes, and owners and operators of municipal
water systems to ensure that Americans are
served by community water systems providing
water that meets health-based standards—
including new regulations, such as recent
rules for cryptosporidium and disinfection
byproducts. To promote compliance with
drinking water standards, states carry out a
variety of activities, such as conducting onsite
sanitary surveys of water systems and working
with small systems to improve their capabili-
ties. EPA will work to improve compliance
rates by providing guidance, training, and
technical assistance; ensuring proper certifica-
tion of water system operators; promoting
consumer awareness of drinking water safety;
maintaining the rate of system sani-
tary surveys and onsite reviews; and
taking appropriate action for non-
compliance.
Small community water systems
are more likely to have difficulty
complying with drinking water
standards. Many serve low-income
populations and are located in rural
areas. Water systems such as those
serving tribal areas,6 Pacific Island
Territories, Alaska Native villages,
and communities along the
U.S.-Mexico border face special
challenges in providing safe water.
To support small communities, EPA
-------
Clean and Safe Water—Objective 2.1: Protect Human Health
will provide training and assistance in using
cost-effective treatment technologies, proper-
ly disposing of waste, and complying with
standards for high-priority contaminants,
including microbes, disinfectants, disinfection
byproducts, and arsenic. We will also work
with states to strengthen small systems' tech-
nical, management, and financial capabilities.
The Safe Drinking Water Information
System is a database that serves as the pri-
mary source of information on compliance
with SDWA requirements. To help states and
authorized tribes manage their drinking water
programs, EPA will continue to improve the
database to ensure that it reflects all applica-
ble drinking water regulatory requirements
and that data are complete, accurate, timely,
and consistent.
Sustainable Infrastructure
Providing drinking water that meets
public health standards often requires an
investment in constructing or maintaining
infrastructure. The Drinking Water State
Revolving Fund (DWSRF) provides water
systems with low-interest loans to improve
infrastructure.
According to EPA's Gap Analysis Report
(2002), even with financial assistance from
the DWSRF the country faces a multi-bil-
lion-dollar gap in capital infrastructure
financing over the next 20 years.7 Assuming
no growth in revenue, the gap is estimated to
be approximately $100 billion between 2000
and 2019. Assuming a real rate of growth
of 3 percent per year, this gap shrinks to a
point of $45 billion. EPA will continue its
commitment to provide capitalization grants
to state DWSRFs until 2018. Low-interest
loans from the state DWSRFs support needed
infrastructure improvements. EPA will work
with states to ensure their SRFs are sustain-
able and to ensure that, nationally, the
DWSRF will provide $1.2 billion annually in
the long term. In addition, EPA will work
with states to ensure that DWSRF funds are
IMPROVING TRIBAL DRINKING WATER
SYSTEM COMPLIANCE
significant challenges in meeting drinking water stan-
dards and protecting sources of drinking water EPA
is taking steps to improve tribal water systems by:
Developing quick-reference guides to help tribes
comply with drinking water regulations.
romotin waters
rotection on tribal lands
ce water rotection lans.
an mpementng source water protecton
Implementing the Public Water System
Supervision and Underground Injection Co
programs directly on tribal lands.
Participating in an interagency effort that
encourages using available funds to improv
tribal access to safe drinking water
managed effectively, and encourage water sys-
tem owners and operators to adopt
sustainable management systems.
Sources of Drinking Water
Protecting sources of drinking water, such
as surface and ground waters, can reduce vio-
lations of drinking water standards. We will
provide training and technical assistance to
states, tribes, and communities taking meas-
ures to prevent or reduce contamination of
source water, and we will collaborate with
stakeholders to protect source water. We are
also protecting ground water that is a source
of drinking water by working with states,
tribes, industry, and other stakeholders to
ensure safe underground injection of waste
materials. This work includes identifying and
evaluating risks from Class V shallow wells and
addressing emerging issues, such as carbon
sequestration and disposing of drinking water
treatment residuals. Finally, we will work
with states and tribes to use Clean Water Act
authorities to prevent contamination of
waters that serve as public water supplies and
will encourage other federal programs to focus
protection efforts in source water areas.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
Water Infrastructure Security
The President has given EPA primary
responsibility for coordinating federal, state,
and local authorities in the protection of
drinking water systems. The Bioterrorism Act
of 2002 requires community water systems
serving more than 3,300 people to develop
vulnerability assessments and to certify emer-
gency response plans. With most of this work
now completed, EPA has shifted its focus to
reducing risks associated with these vulnera-
bilities. Our
water security
program will
provide tools
and assistance
to prevent,
detect,
respond to,
and recover
from inten-
tional acts
and natural
disasters;
encourage
mutual aid
agreements
within states
and regions;
and provide
training and exercises to improve water
utilities' preparedness.
We are also undertaking two significant
initiatives: (1) EPA's Homeland Security
Sentinel Initiative (formerly known as Water
Sentinel), which will deploy and test a con-
tamination warning system; and (2) the
Water Alliance for Threat Reduction, which
will provide direct water security training to
drinking water utilities serving more than
100,000 people. Collectively, these efforts
will represent a robust approach for address-
ing the threats, vulnerabilities, and
consequences facing the water sector.
Tribal Access to Safe
Drinking Water
The 2002 World Summit on Sustainable
Development in Johannesburg adopted the
goal of reducing the number of people lacking
access to safe drinking water and basic sanita-
tion by 50 percent by 2015.8 In the United
States, EPA will focus on providing infra-
structure to increase the number of tribal
homes with access to safe drinking water and
basic sanitation. We will support develop-
ment of
drinking
water and
wastewater
facilities
in Indian
country and
Alaska Native
villages using
set-aside
funds from
the Drinking
Water and
Clean Water
State
Revolving
Funds as well
as targeted
grants.
We will also work with other federal
agencies that play key roles in addressing
this problem, such as the U.S. Departments
of Health and Human Services, Interior,
and Agriculture, to coordinate a strategy
for improving tribes' access to water and
sanitation. (Note that projects to improve
infrastructure along the U.S.-Mexico
Border and in the Pacific Islands will also
increase peoples' access to safe drinking
water and basic sanitation. They are
described under Goal 4: Healthy
Communities and Ecosystems.)
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
safewater/.
-------
Clean and Safe Water—Objective 2.1: Protect Human Health
FISH AND SHELLFISH SAFE TO EAT
Some toxic contaminants that enter water
bodies can move up the food chain, building up
to levels in fish that make them unsafe to eat.
The majority of fish consumption advisories
issued today, for example, are the result of
unhealthy levels of mercury, released into the
air from combustion sources, such as coal-fired
power plants and incinerators. The mercury is
then deposited by rainfall onto land and water,
where it is methylated by bacteria and moves up
the aquatic food web through fish to people. To
make more fish safe to eat, EPA is working to
reduce releases of mercury to the air through
controls on combustion sources. Federal mar-
ket-based and other regulatory air programs, for
example, will reduce electric-generating unit
emissions of mercury. (See Goal 1: Clean Air
and Global Climate Change.)
In addition to reducing mercury emissions,
EPA is working to improve water and sediment
quality. We will continue to implement Clean
Water Act programs designed to reduce dis-
charges from stormwater systems, combined
sewer overflows, and concentrated animal
feeding operations and to reduce runoff from
nonpoint sources. We are also working to
restore the quality of aquatic sediment in criti-
cal water bodies, with special emphasis on the
Great Lakes. To reduce the potential for future
sediment contamination, EPA is working with
its partners to reduce the use of polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs), a major sediment contami-
nant, in electrical equipment. (See Goal 4:
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems.)
A key element of EPA's strategy for
making more fish safe to eat is expanding
information about fish safety and making it
available to the public. The National Listing
of Fish Consumption Advisories website, for
example, allows states and tribes to post their
advisories and provide information about
locations, fish affected, and the number of
meals or amount of fish that a person can
safely eat. EPA will continue to guide states
and tribes in monitoring fish safety and
issuing fish consumption advisories.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
waterscience/fish/.
Like fish, shellfish can be unsafe
for consumption as a result of accumulat-
ing disease-causing microorganisms and
toxic algae. The U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA), Interstate Shellfish
Sanitation Commission (ISSC), and coastal
states work together to manage the safety of
shellfish. States monitor shellfishing waters
and can restrict harvesting if shellfish are
unsafe. Such restrictions can be the result of
poor water quality due to anthropogenic
activity, such as discharges from sewage treat-
ment plants. Through its surface water
program, EPA is addressing anthropogenic
sources that result in such closures. We will
continue to work with states, FDA, ISSC,
and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) to increase the
percentage of shellfishing acres open for har-
vesting by improving water conditions.
These agencies have developed an infor-
mation system that uses state monitoring data
to pinpoint areas where shellfishing has been
restricted. This system, now operating in 13
of 22 shellfishing states, enables EPA and
states to identify possible sources of pollutants
restricting the use of shellfishing waters. EPA
will also use this information to help develop
watershed plans, implement National Estuary
Program plans, issue or reissue permits to
point sources, enforce existing permits, and
implement controls over polluted runoff.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
waterscience/shellfish/.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
WATER SAFE FOR SWIMMING
Recreational waters, especially beaches in
coastal areas and the Great Lakes, provide
outstanding recreational opportunities for
many Americans. Swimming in some recre-
ational waters, however, can pose an
increased risk of illness as a result of exposure
to microbial pathogens. In some cases, these
pathogens can be traced to sewage treatment
plants, malfunctioning septic systems, and
discharges from storm water systems and ani-
mal feeding operations. EPA is implementing
a three-part strategy to protect public health
and the quality of the nation's recreational
waters.
First, we will be working with states to
ensure that state-adopted criteria for
pathogens and bacteria in waters designated
for recreational use are current and scientifi-
cally sound. (In a related effort, EPA has
developed new analytic methods for monitor-
ing pathogen levels at beaches and other
recreational waters.) We will continue to
work with state, tribal, and local governments
to deliver core programs of the Clean Water
Act: developing and implementing Total
Maximum Daily Loads and implementing the
discharge permit; urban storm water control;
and nonpoint pollution control programs. In
addition, we will be encouraging state, tribal,
and local governments to adopt voluntary
guidelines for managing on-site/decentralized
sewage treatment systems and using Clean
Water Revolving Loan Funds to finance sys-
tems where appropriate.
Second, we are implementing controls for
combined sewer overflows (CSOs), which
occur in about 770 communities around the
country. CSOs can affect the quality of recre-
ational waters by releasing untreated
wastewater potentially containing high levels
of pathogens. EPA, states, and local govern-
ments are making steady progress toward
reducing overflows under the "CSO Policy."10
Most communities with CSOs have now
implemented basic control measures, and 48
percent of permittees have adopted schedules
for implementing long-term control plans for
CSOs. By 2011, permittees will have complet-
ed long-term control plans and EPA and states
will be monitoring progress toward fully imple-
menting the controls called for in these plans.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
npdes/cso.
The third element of our strategy focuses
on public beaches along coastal areas and the
Great Lakes. Under the Beaches
Environmental Assessment and Coastal
Health (BEACH) Act, EPA provides grants
to state, tribal, and local governments for
programs to monitor beach water quality and
notify the public when bacterial contamina-
tion poses a risk to swimmers. We will
continue to expand public access to internet-
based beach information on our website.
Governments receiving BEACH Act grants
will post information on water quality, beach
monitoring and advisory programs, and beach
closures, which will enable beach-goers to
make informed choices.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
beaches/.
-------
Clean and Safe Water—Objective 2.2: Protect Water Quality
OBJECTIVE 2.2: PROTECT WATER QUALITY
PROTECT THE QUALITY OF RIVERS, LAKES, AND STREAMS ON A WATERSHED BASIS AND
PROTECT COASTAL AND OCEAN WATERS.
Sub-objective 2.2.1: Improve Water Quality
on a Watershed Basis. By 2012, use pollution
prevention and restoration approaches to pro-
tect the quality of rivers, lakes, and streams
on a watershed basis.
Strategic Targets
• By 2012, attain water quality stan-
dards for all pollutants and
impairments in more than 2,250
water bodies identified in 2002 as not
attaining standards (cumulative).
(2002 baseline: 39,798 water bodies
identified by states as not meeting
water quality standards. Water bodies
where mercury is among multiple pol-
lutants causing impairment may be
counted toward this target when all
pollutants but mercury attain stan-
dards, but must be identified as still
needing restoration for mercury
[1,703 impaired water bodies are
impaired by multiple pollutants
including mercury, and 6,501 are
impaired by mercury alone].)
• By 2012, remove at least 5,600 of the
specific causes of water body impair-
ment identified by states in 2002
(cumulative). (2002 baseline:
Estimate of 69,677 specific causes of
water body impairment identified by
states.)
• By 2012, improve water quality con-
ditions in 250 impaired watersheds
nationwide using the watershed
approach (cumulative). (2002 base-
line: 0 watersheds improved of an
estimated 4,800 impaired watersheds
of focus having 1 or more water bod-
ies impaired. The watershed
boundaries for this measure are those
established at the "12-digit" scale by
the U.S. Geological Survey [USGS].
Watersheds at this scale average 22
square miles in size. "Improved"
means that 1 or more of the impair-
ment causes identified in 2002 are
removed for at least 40 percent of the
impaired water bodies or impaired
miles/acres, or there is significant
watershed-wide improvement, as
demonstrated by valid scientific
information, in 1 or more water qual-
ity parameters associated with the
impairments.)
• Through 2012, the condition of the
nation's wadeable streams does not
degrade (i.e., there is no statistically
significant increase in the percent of
streams rated "poor" and no statisti-
cally significant decrease in the
streams rated "good"). (2006 baseline:
Wadeable Stream Survey identifies
28 percent of streams in good condi-
tion; 25 percent in fair condition;
42 percent in poor condition.)
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
• By 2012, improve water quality in
Indian country at not fewer than
50 baseline monitoring stations in
tribal waters11 (cumulative) (i.e.,
show improvement in one or more
of seven key parameters: dissolved
oxygen, pH, water temperature,
total nitrogen, total phosphorus,
pathogen indicators, and turbidity).
(2006 baseline: 185 monitoring sta-
tions on tribal waters located where
water quality has been depressed
and activities are underway or
planned to improve water quality,
out of an estimated 1,661 stations
operated by tribes.)
• By 2015, in coordination with
other federal agencies, reduce by
50 percent the number of homes on
tribal lands12 lacking access to basic
sanitation (cumulative). (2003 base-
line: Indian Health Service data
indicate that 8.4 percent of homes
on tribal lands lack access to basic
sanitation [i.e., 26,777 homes lack-
ing access out of an estimated
319,070 homes].)
Sub-objective 2.2.2: Improve Coastal
and Ocean Water. By 2011, prevent water
pollution and protect coastal and ocean
systems to improve national coastal aquatic
ecosystem health by at least 0.2 points on the
"good/fair/poor" scale of the National Coastal
Condition Report. (2004 baseline: National
rating of "fair/poor," or 2.3, where the rating
is based on a system ranging from 1.0 to 5.0
in which 1 is poor and 5 is good using the
National Coastal Condition Report indica-
tors for water and sediment, coastal habitat,
benthic index, and fish contamination.)
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, at least maintain aquatic
ecosystem health on the
"good/fair/poor" scale of the National
Coastal Condition Report in the
Northeast Region. (2004 baseline:
Northeast rating of 1.8.)
• By 2011, at least maintain aquatic
ecosystem health on the
"good/fair/poor" scale of the National
Coastal Condition Report in the
Southeast Region. (2004 baseline:
Southeast rating of 3.8.)
• By 2011, at least maintain aquatic
ecosystem health on the
"good/fair/poor" scale of the National
Coastal Condition Report in the
West Coast Region. (2004 baseline:
West Coast rating of 2.0.)
• By 2011, at least maintain aquatic
ecosystem health on the
"good/fair/poor" scale of the National
Coastal Condition Report in the
Puerto Rico Region. (2004 baseline:
Puerto Rico rating of 1.7.)
• By 2011, 95 percent of active dredged
material ocean dumping sites will
have achieved environmentally
acceptable conditions (as reflected in
each site's management plan and meas-
ured through onsite monitoring
programs). (2005 baseline: 94 percent.)
-------
Clean and Safe Water—Objective 2.2: Protect Water Quality
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
PROTECTING WATER QUALITY
IMPROVE WATER QUALITY ON A
WATERSHED BASIS
To improve water quality, EPA will work
with states, interstate agencies, tribes, local
governments, and others in three key areas:
maintaining strong core programs that
emphasize watershed protection; identifying
and restoring impaired waters on a watershed
basis; and investing in water infrastructure
and strengthening management practices to
improve the sustainability of water systems.
Strong Core Programs
Building on the progress toward clean
water achieved over the past 30 years, EPA
is working with states and tribes to imple-
ment four critical components of the Clean
Water Act: scientifically sound water
quality standards; effective water monitoring;
strong programs for controlling nonpoint
sources of pollution; and strong discharge
permit programs.
Scientifically sound water quality
standards are vital to protecting water for
swimming, public uses, and fish and wildlife,
and they provide the environmental base-
lines for water quality programs. EPA
supports state and tribal programs by provid-
ing scientific water quality criteria
information. For example, we are developing
or improving criteria for nutrients and
pathogens in ambient water and determining
how to address emerging contaminants, such
as pharmaceuticals and personal care prod-
ucts found in the aquatic environment. We
will continue to work with states and tribes
to improve water quality standards and to
assist them in adopting appropriate designat-
ed uses and criteria. We will also work with
states and tribes to operate and administer
the standards program effectively. Every
3 years states and authorized tribes are
expected to review their standards and revise
them if necessary; EPA is committed to
review and approve or disapprove changes to
standards promptly.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
waterscience/standards/.
To improve water quality, we need com-
plete, reliable data on the condition of the
nation's rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands.
Among our top priorities for the next 5 years
are continuing long-term cooperative EPA-
state surveys of water conditions similar to the
recently completed survey of wadeable streams
and focusing next on lakes and rivers; imple-
menting state and tribal water-monitoring
strategies on established schedules; and
improving water quality data bases. This
monitoring work will help inform assessments
of fish tissue contamination and of the
conditions of coastal waters, ground water,
and beaches.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
owow/monitoring/.
IMPLEMENTING CORE PROGRAMS
ON A WATERSHED BASIS
EPA and states are delivering core
Clean Water Act programs on a water
shed basis, hor example, we are:
Issuing watershed discharge permits.
Implementing water quality trading at
the watershed level.
Assessing infrastructure needs by
watershed.
Demonstrating watershed scale pro-
gram integration through targeted
watershed assistance grants.
A key component of the Clean Water
Act is controlling nonpoint sources of pollu-
tion. EPA will continue working with states
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
to reduce nonpoint pollution by implement-
ing best management practices and providing
education and technical assistance. We will
help states develop plans for watersheds with
impaired water quality caused by nonpoint
sources and use those plans to coordinate
monitoring, implementation, and efficient
use of federal and other funding. A critical
step in this effort is forging strategic partner-
ships with a broad range of agricultural
interests, and we will work with federal part-
ners to ensure that federal resources are
managed in a coordinated manner.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
owow/nps/.
IMPROVING WATER QUALITY ON
TRIBAL LANDS
To improve and protect water quality on
tribal lands, EPA is working with tribes to:
Develop water quality standards and
monitoring strategies.
Develop nonpoint pollution programs
under Section 3 9 grants.
Develop water permit programs.
Develop tribal wetlands programs.
Develop watershed protection plans.
Involve tribes in developing Total
Provide Clean Water Indian Set-Aside
and Alaska Native Villages Sanitation
Grants to address wastewater infra-
structure issues.
Increase access to basic sanitation and
safe drinking water
The National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) requires point
sources discharging to the nation's waters to
have permits for those discharges and indus-
trial facilities that discharge to sewer systems
to have pretreatment programs to reduce
their impact on sewage treatment plants.
Over the next 5 years, EPA will continue to
strengthen management of the permit pro-
gram. We will:
• Monitor implementation of the fol-
low-up actions that resulted from the
Permitting for Environmental Results
Strategy we recently completed to
address concerns about the backlog in
issuing permits and the health of
state NPDES programs.
• Continue to support states in using
innovative permit tools. Momentum
is building for watershed-based per-
mitting and pollutant trading, and
over the next 5 years EPA expects to
begin to see the results of early efforts
in this area.
• Work to ensure that permits issued by
state and local governments to con-
trol storm water from industrial sites,
construction sites, and municipal
storm sewers are promptly reissued
when they expire.
• Ensure that industrial discharges to
publicly-owned sewage treatment
works are pretreated effectively. We
will provide tools for states and local-
ities to work with industrial
dischargers and will monitor the per-
centage of significant industrial
facilities meeting pretreatment
requirements.
• Revise rules for discharges from
Concentrated Animal Feeding
Operations (CAFOs) to reflect court
findings. We expect that after the
revised rules take effect in 2007, per-
mits will be issued promptly, and
CAFOs will begin implementing
nutrient management plans.
• Develop or revise national regula-
tions addressing key industrial sources
of pollution. EPA will consider prom-
ulgating new wastewater regulations
for airport de icing and drinking water
-------
Clean and Safe Water—Objective 2.2: Protect Water Quality
treatment residuals and revising regu-
lations for some chemical
manufacturers.
• Continue working with states to
address and resolve significant non-
compliance with discharge permits in
a timely manner, emphasizing
instances of significant noncompli-
ance in which excessive effluents
contribute to impaired waters.
• Continue working with states and
sewage treatment plants to improve
compliance with permit conditions.
To learn more go to: www.cfpub.epa.gov/
npdes/.
Restore Impaired Waters on a
Watershed Basis
In reports to EPA, states identify waters
as "impaired" when one or more of the uses
designated in water quality standards is not
being attained. EPA, states, interstate agen-
cies, and tribes are expanding and
strengthening efforts to meet our 2012 goal of
restoring more than 2,250 of the 39,798
waters that states identified as impaired in
2002. In a related effort, we are also working
to restore and protect large-scale ecosystems
around the country. (See Goal 4: Healthy
Communities and Ecosystems.)
Over the next several years, we will con-
tinue to work with states to coordinate
identification of impaired waters and improve
data on location and causes of impairment.
Better data will enable EPA and states to iden-
tify watersheds where impaired waters are
clustered and determine likely causes and
remedies. Improved data will also help states
refine schedules for developing TMDLs so that
TMDLs needed to restore a group of impaired
waters can be coordinated. Developing TMDLs
on a watershed basis will be cost effective and
create opportunities for coordinating response
programs and innovations such as watershed-
based permitting and water quality trading.
Water quality trading is a valuable tool that
promotes shared responsibility for controlling
discharges within a watershed and reduces
pollutants at lowest cost.
EPA will work with states to develop
coordinated watershed restoration plans
focused on small, "12-digit" watersheds as
defined by the U.S. Geological Survey. These
plans will demonstrate how to coordinate
planning and implementation of pollution
control actions to improve water quality.
We will also continue working with states
to develop TMDLs consistent with state
TMDL development schedules and court-
ordered deadlines. Since 2000, states and
EPA have made significant progress in devel-
oping and approving TMDLs, and we have
completed more than 20,000 TMDLs across
the country. We expect to maintain the cur-
rent pace of approximately 3,500 TMDLs
completed and approved per year.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
owow/tmdl/.
As additional TMDLs are developed to
support those already in place, the number of
impaired water bodies and watersheds ready
for implementing pollution controls will
increase. EPA and states must carefully define
and schedule restoration actions resulting
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
from TMDLs. In some cases, a single permit
revision or enforcement action may bring
about restoration. In other cases, water body
or watershed-scale restoration plans linking
point source controls, nonpoint source man-
agement practices, and financing support will
be needed.
To support this effort, EPA will refine the
selection and issuance of "high-priority" per-
mits—those expired permits that states
determine have a significant environmental
impact. A permit might be accorded high pri-
ority, for example, if the permitted facility
were contributing to impaired waters or if the
permit incorporated new TMDLs and water
quality standards or had the potential to
contribute to watershed restoration. EPA
will ensure that these critical permits are
issued promptly.
Support Sustainable Wastewater
Infrastructure
Sustaining water and wastewater infra-
structure is a critical challenge. Existing
systems are aging—some have components
more than 100 years old—and growing, shift-
ing populations require investment in new
systems. EPA's Gap Analysis Report (2002)
estimated that if capital spending for waste-
water infrastructure remained at current
levels, the potential gap in funding between
2000 and 2019 would be about $120 billion.
Assuming a real annual rate of growth in rev-
enues of 3 percent, the gap shrinks to $21
billion. Furthermore, many utilities have not
focused attention on managing for long-term
sustainability.
To address this challenge, the nation
must fundamentally change the way it views,
values, invests in, and manages water infra-
structure. All parties will need to collaborate
to find effective, efficient, and fair solutions;
EPA is one partner in a larger, cooperative
effort to address this nationwide infrastruc-
ture problem. To help facilitate solutions,
we have developed a Sustainable
Infrastructure Strategy, organized around
four main themes or "pillars:"
• Sustainable Management Practices:
We will work with utilities and asso-
ciations to promote sustainable
management practices and finalize a
national strategy in early 2007.
• Water Efficiency: We will develop
"WaterSense," a voluntary partner-
ship program modeled after EPA's
Energy Star program, to create a con-
sumer market for water-efficient
products.
• Full Cost Pricing: We will identify
the range of approaches used to set
rate structures based on full cost pric-
ing, and we will develop options we
can share with communities.
• A Watershed Approach: We will
work with utilities, watershed organi-
zations, and others to provide tools
and information that will promote a
watershed approach to infrastructure
decisions.
EPA is developing an Internet-based
Clean Watersheds Needs Survey (OWNS)
data system that will allow communities and
states to enter and update information on
their pollution prevention and treatment
project needs. CWNS data will be easily
accessible for setting project priorities,
Internet mapping analyses, and other purpos-
es that support infrastructure management.
We are also undertaking a major research and
development initiative to identify water
infrastructure needs that can be addressed
through innovation.
-------
Clean and Safe Water—Objective 2.2: Protect Water Quality
Clean Water State Revolving Funds
(CWSRFs), another tool supporting sustain-
able infrastructure management, provide
low-interest loans to help finance wastewater
treatment facilities and other clean water
projects. A portion of CWSRF funding is set
aside each year for water infrastructure
improvements on tribal lands, including
expanding access to basic sanitation. EPA
provides grants to capitalize state CWSRFs
which may be used to fund projects that sup-
port an integrated watershed approach,
including repairing and upgrading onsite
treatment systems. As of early 2006, the fed-
eral government had invested more than $23
billion in capitalizing state CWSRFs.13 The
revolving nature of the funds and substantial
additions from states have increased that
investment, cumulatively over the years mak-
ing $55 billion available for loans.14 We will
continue our commitment to provide annual
capitalization grants to CWSRFs until 2011.
Additionally, we will work with state
CWSRF programs to maintain their excellent
fiduciary condition.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/owm/
cwfinanceomdex/htm.
IMPROVE COASTAL AND OCEAN WATERS
EPA tracks progress in improving coastal
and ocean waters through the National
Coastal Condition Report, a cooperative
EPA, NOAA, U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA), and Department of the
Interior (DOI) project established in 2002. In
describing the ecological and environmental
condition of U.S. coastal waters, the report
indicates that, overall, coastal waters are
improving. To maintain this progress, we
will focus on:
• Assessing coastal conditions. The
National Coastal Condition Report
uses five indicators to determine the
condition of coastal waters. EPA and
other federal agencies will review
changing conditions and periodically
issue updated assessments. To support
this work, we are developing indices
for measuring the health of coral reefs
and monitoring compliance with
environmental requirements at ocean
dumping sites.
• Reducing vessel discharges.
Discharges from vessels threaten U.S.
waters and ecosystems. Ships discharge
pollutants, and discharges of ballast
water can spread invasive species, such
as zebra mussels. We will assess the
need for discharge standards for cruise
ships operating in Alaskan waters;
cooperate with the U.S. Department
of Defense on establishing discharge
standards for armed forces vessels; and
assess our programs to reduce sewage
discharges. To address the problem of
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
invasive species, we will assist the U.S.
Coast Guard in developing ballast
water discharge standards and contin-
ue to pursue this issue at the
international level.
Implementing coastal nonpoint source
pollution programs. Rapid growth in
coastal areas can result in increased
pollution from nonpoint sources. We
will continue to work with NOAA,
coastal states, and Great Lakes states to
reduce nonpoint source pollution in
the "coastal zone."
Managing dredged material. Several
hundred million cubic yards of sedi-
ment are dredged from waterways,
ports, and harbors every year. EPA
and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (the Corps) share responsi-
bility for regulating the disposal of
this sediment. To ensure that sedi-
ment is disposed of safely and
properly, we will work with the Corps
to evaluate disposal sites, designate
and monitor sites, and review disposal
permits. We will also work with states
and other federal agencies to ensure
that major ports and harbors have
plans for managing dredged material,
which include provisions for benefi-
cial reuse of the material.
• Supporting international marine pol-
lution control. With the U.S. Coast
Guard, NOAA, and the U.S.
Department of State, EPA is negoti-
ating international standards at the
International Maritime Organization.
We will use these standards as a
mechanism to address invasive aquat-
ic species, harmful antifoulants, bilge
water, and marine debris.
We will coordinate these efforts with
those of other federal agencies, states, tribes,
and public and private parties. To improve
coastal waters, we must successfully imple-
ment pollution controls in inland watersheds
(see Sub-objective 2.2.1). Our progress will
also be tied to geographically focused projects,
such as the National Estuary Program,as well
as ecosystem protection programs. (See Goal
4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems.)
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/owow/
oceans/nccr/.
OBJECTIVE 2.3: ENHANCE SCIENCE AND RESEARCH
BY 2011, CONDUCT LEADING-EDGE, SOUND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH TO SUPPORT THE
PROTECTION OF HUMAN HEALTH THROUGH THE REDUCTION OF HUMAN EXPOSURE TO
CONTAMINANTS IN DRINKING WATER, FISH AND SHELLFISH, AND RECREATIONAL
WATERS AND TO SUPPORT THE PROTECTION OF AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS—SPECIFICALLY,
THE QUALITY OF RIVERS, LAKES, AND STREAMS, AND COASTAL AND OCEAN WATERS.
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
ENHANCING SCIENCE AND RESEARCH
EPA conducts research dedicated to the
drinking water and water quality programs,
and brings to bear additional research on
human health and ecological issues conduct-
ed in support of other programs. (See Goal 4:
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems.)
DRINKING WATER RESEARCH PROGRAM
The SDWA Amendments of 1996 direct
EPA to conduct research to strengthen the sci-
entific foundation for standards that limit
public exposure to drinking water contami-
nants. The program's primary goals focus on
developing research products that the Agency
will use to make regulatory decisions on candi-
date drinking water contaminants and review
-------
Clean and Safe Water—Human Capital
existing regulations. In addition, EPA regional
offices, states, tribes, municipalities, and utili-
ties often need technical advice to put new and
revised drinking water regulations into action.
Our Drinking Water Research Program
(DWRP) develops drinking water treatment
strategies, compliance monitoring methods,
and tools for source water protection to support
EPA and its partners in implementing SDWA.
We will advance methods for assessing expo-
sure and monitoring contaminants; study
contaminant mode-of-action and dose-
response; determine treatment, performance,
and cost parameters; and study the effects of
distribution systems on water quality. By pro-
viding the science and engineering information
that we and our partners need, our research
contributes measurable results that advance our
efforts to ensure safe drinking water.
WATER QUALITY RESEARCH PROGRAM
EPA's Water Quality Research Program
(WQRP) priorities reflect the research needs
of our national water program, regions, states,
and tribes. We
are targeting our
research efforts
to achieve meas-
urable results:
protective criteria
for designated
uses of aquatic
systems; diag-
nostic and
forecasting tech-
niques related to
designated uses of
aquatic systems;
and sustainable watershed technologies. For
example, WQRP research will help the
Agency promulgate protective standards; iden-
tify contaminants and how they contribute to
impaired waters; and use tools for restoring and
protecting the nation's waters that consider
point and nonpoint sources of contamination
and the treatment and beneficial use of
biosolids. WQRP activity directly supports the
Agency's goals for improving water quality and
will contribute to the environmental outcomes
we are working to achieve.
HUMAN CAPITAL
Over the past 20 years, EPA has delegat-
ed significant authority for protecting surface
water and drinking water to state govern-
ments. As a result, our role increasingly is
one of providing our partners and stakehold-
ers with guidance, assistance, and financial
and information resources. We will continue
to be responsible for coordinating national
water policy and evaluating water programs,
as well as for directly implementing certain
programs for some states and tribes.
Our evolving role in protecting water quali-
ty means that our workforce must be competent
in communication, policy development, and
managing contracts and assistance agreements,
as well as in engineering and life science disci-
plines. EPA's water program is establishing a
Workforce Council to review workforce initia-
tives and advise senior managers on priorities
for improving quality of work life.
The water program is also assessing
the optimal skill mix needed to fulfill
mission-critical assignments, the distribution
of tasks among those positions, and expected
trends in staff retirement. It has formed a
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
Recruitment Council of staff and managers to
plan and coordinate participation in job fairs,
train employees on the recruitment process,
and improve recruitment information shar-
ing. In addition, water program offices have
established or are working to establish ties to
historically black colleges, as well as to other
colleges and universities, to ensure a diverse
workforce into the future.
Recognizing that today's staffers are tomor-
row's leaders, our water program has initiated
several long-term efforts to provide employees
with training and career guidance. The Water
Careers Program provides a variety of opportu-
nities related to individual development plans,
mentoring and coaching, and leadership.
About 100 water program staff members have
participated in this leadership development
program, instituted in 2002. The water pro-
gram also provides key training programs to
EPA and state employees including the
Drinking Water Academy, the Water Quality
Standards Academy, the Watershed Academy,
and the NPDES Permit Writer's Course.
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
Most of the strategic targets we have estab-
lished to achieve our goal of clean and safe
water are measurable and reportable on an
annual basis. Using a "bottom up" approach,
our national water program works closely with
our regional offices and states to develop annu-
al national targets, which are captured in
annual national water program guidance. To
track annual progress toward our research
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE MEASURES
Our water program is participating in an Agency-
wide effort to develop and strengthen measures tc
ensure that the environmental and public health
benefits of programs are equitably shared. Under
our goal for clean and safe water; we will measure
tribal water systems' compliance with drinking
water standards,
waters, ar
tribal access to safe drinking water and basic sanita-
In the future, our national water program expects to
be able to use established, Agency-wide criteria that
identify "environmental justice" areas for which we w
develop measures of progress in improving drinking
objective, we use a number of objective meas-
ures of customer satisfaction, product impact
and quality, and efficiency.
Using such sources as program
evaluations and environmental indicators, we
have developed two new strategic targets and
related measures that will also be included in
the Agency's forthcoming Report on the
Environment (ROE) ,15 One measure addresses
the chemical, biological and physical condi-
tion of wadeable streams; the second
expresses the mercury blood-levels of women
of child-bearing age, a reflection of the health
risk from consuming contaminated fish.
IMPROVING PERFORMANCE
MEASUREMENT
As we incorporated improved measures in
this Strategic Plan, we also made a preliminary
assessment of longer-term opportunities for
improving performance measurement. Based
on this assessment, we will work to expand
and sustain a scientifically—sound, statistical-
ly-valid monitoring regimen to characterize
the condition of the nation's waters, to
advance measurement of water quality condi-
tions on tribal lands, and to improve measures
related to environmental justice.
-------
Clean and Safe Water—Using Feedback from Performance Assessments and Program Evaluations
USING FEEDBACK FROM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS
AND PROGRAM EVALUATIONS
EPA's water program assesses program and
regional performance on a continuing basis
and prepares mid- and end-of-year perform-
ance reports using the environmental and
program measures established in its annual
national water program guidance to describe
program progress. These reports include rec-
ommendations to improve specific instances
of poor performance, disseminate "best prac-
tices," and inform the development of future
annual guidance and strategic plans. Through
this process, we have identified the need for
performance improvements such as integrat-
ing clean water and drinking water programs,
reducing data reporting lags in the drinking
water program, and expediting reviews of
tribal applications to administer EPA regula-
tory programs.
In addition, water program managers visit
three to four EPA regional offices and great
water body offices each year to discuss pro-
gram management and performance. Topics
include assessing regional performance
against measures in the Strategic Plan, regional
water issues identified in regional plans, and
the program commitments that states and
tribes make annually in their grant work
plans. These assessments help identify inno-
vations or "best practices" developed by
regions, states, tribes, watershed organiza-
tions, and others, which can be described in
water program performance reports and
shared across the country.
Water programs are also evaluated peri-
odically by EPA and organizations such as
EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG), the
Government Accountability Office, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB),
and the National Academy of Sciences. We
have used the results of such evaluations to
formulate some of the water program goals
and strategies presented in this Strategic Plan.
For example, after evaluating the Agency's
work with states and tribes to implement
clean water programs on a watershed basis,
OIG recommended that we redesign our
watershed measure and revise supporting pro-
gram activity measures. EPA responded by
developing a new measure addressing
improvement in water quality in "12 digit"
watersheds and expanding and revising water-
shed-related program activity measures in its
annual national water program guidance. The
new watershed measure addresses smaller geo-
graphic areas than did our previous measure
and is more flexible in that it recognizes
improvement in water quality as well as full
restoration of impaired waters.
-
In another study which influenced this
Strategic Plan, OIG evaluated the implementa-
tion of programs to protect sources of drinking
water. Based on OIG's assessment, our nation-
al program and regional managers worked
with states and tribes to revise and simplify
measures related to source water protection.
This effort has helped us better define an
ambitious and realistic target for implement-
ing source water protection programs by 2011.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
A number of water programs were
reviewed using OMB's Program Assessment
Rating Tool (PART). These include Public
Water Supply Supervision, rated Adequate;
Underground Injection Control, rated
Adequate; Surface Water Protection, rated
Moderately Effective; and Oceans and
Coastal Protection, rated Adequate.
The EPA Board of Scientific Counselors
(BOSC) and OMB evaluated the Drinking
Water Research Program in 2005. BOSC
found the research to be of high quality and
national importance and the program rele-
vant and critical to EPA's mission. OMB
found that the program has developed annual
and long-term measures of performance,
coordinates its work with other agencies,
employs good oversight of competitively
awarded grants, and requires grantees to work
toward program goals. Input from these
evaluations was instrumental in revising our
long-term drinking water research plans.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
water/waterplan.
EMERGING ISSUES AND EXTERNAL FACTORS
Over the past several years, EPA has
assessed emerging issues that can affect our
goals for clean and safe water. Among the
issues identified were:
• Decaying Water Infrastructure and
Population Growth: Municipal
wastewater infrastructure constructed
in the 1970s and 1980s, and an
increasing percentage of drinking
water infrastructure, is nearing the
end of its useful life. Responding to
this challenge is complicated by the
demands of a steadily growing popu-
lation for drinking water supplies,
wastewater treatment, and storm
water management. EPA is in the
first stages of an innovative, broad-
based collaboration with states and
municipalities to implement new
strategies to strengthen water infra-
structure management, including new
initiatives related to water efficiency,
sustainable management practices,
and innovative financing of infra-
structure.
Water Scarcity: Demand for water
for municipal and other uses is
growing steadily. Meeting this
demand while protecting ecological
values of aquatic resources will be a
significant challenge.
Nanotechnology: The predicted
explosion in the use of nanotechnol-
ogy offers potential for both
innovative water treatment methods
and harm to aquatic systems from the
release of nanoscale devices and
products.
-------
Clean and Safe Water—Emerging Issues and External Factors
• Remote Sensing Technology:
Dramatic progress in miniaturizing
sensors and gathering environmental
data from remote locations will open
new avenues for monitoring the
condition of waters.
• Climate Change: Understanding of
the effects of climate change on the
health and productivity of coastal
waters and habitats, fisheries, and
wetlands is necessary to inform sound
environmental management and
protection of these resources.
• Pharmaceuticals in Wastewater:
More pharmaceutical products of
more varied types are reaching
aquatic systems through wastewater
systems, with the potential for
unanticipated impacts on ecological
systems and human health.
• Renewable Energy: As energy needs
increase and costs from conventional
sources climb, demand for alterna-
tives, including renewable energy,
will grow. Recent studies have
demonstrated the potential for
sewage treatment plants and animal
feeding operations to generate signifi-
cant amounts of renewable energy
from treatment process by-products.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/ocfo/
futures/perspectives.htm.
As we address these emerging water issues
and continue to strengthen and improve
current programs, a number of external fac-
tors can affect our success. For example,
much of our progress in achieving our goals
will depend on maintaining strong partner-
ships. States, our primary partners in
implementing clean water and safe drinking
water programs, are facing budget problems
and perhaps deficits. EPA recognizes that
state budget shortfalls are an external factor
that may limit progress toward clean and
safe water goals.
Local governments also play a critical
role in implementing clean and safe water
programs. Municipalities and other local
entities have partnered with states and the
federal government to finance wastewater
treatment and drinking water systems, and
their continued contribution is essential to
meeting water goals. Municipalities are also
taking on additional responsibilities for
addressing storm water and CSOs. In the
case of the drinking water program, effective
local management of drinking water systems,
including protection of source waters, is
essential to maintaining high rates of compli-
ance with drinking water standards. More
than 90 percent of the nation's 52,000
community water systems are smaller systems
(serving 10,000 or fewer people) that often
struggle to provide safe drinking water.16
Continued consultation with local
governments is critical to achieving clean
and safe water.
EPA implements programs in Indian
country, helps build tribes' capacity to admin-
ister clean and safe water programs, and
works as co-regulators with authorized tribes.
Tribal resource needs are great, however, and
unlike states, many tribes are still developing
programs to administer clean and safe water
programs. Inadequate progress in developing
these programs is another factor that could
limit progress toward our clean water goals.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
Key elements of the national water
program, including nonpoint source control,
source water protection, and watershed man-
agement, require broad partnerships among
many federal, state, and local agencies and
the private sector. Over the next several
years, building partnerships with the agricul-
tural community (such as USDA, state
agricultural agencies, and local conservation
districts) is a top priority for meeting clean
water goals. We will continue to provide
water quality data and technical assistance
that can help USDA target its runoff control
programs.
Similarly, we rely on many agencies for
monitoring data to measure progress toward
our clean and safe water goals. States lead the
effort in water quality monitoring. Other
agencies also provide critical information; for
example, USGS maintains water-monitoring
stations throughout the nation, and NOAA
provides information on coastal waters.
Other federal partnerships are critical to
achieving our water program goals. EPA relies
on the Corps to co-administer the Section
404 program of the Clean Water Act. In fact,
the Corps acts as the lead federal agency for
permitting the discharge of dredged or fill
material and, as part of its civil works
projects, addressing dredged material manage-
ment issues in U.S. waters. We will continue
to work with the U.S. Agency for
International Development, Department of
State, and other interested stakeholders to
improve access to safe drinking water and
sanitation worldwide in support of the United
Nations Millennium Goals. To this end, we
will promote the international use of Water
Safety Plans as a health-based risk assessment
tool for improving water systems.
Finally, all of our coastal and oceans
activities are carried out in partnership with
other federal agencies and, in some cases,
with international, state, local, and private
entities as well. We rely on the efforts of the
U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Coast
Guard, Alaska and other states, and a
number of cruise ship and environmental and
nongovernmental organizations to manage
wastewater discharges from vessels.
-------
Clean and Safe Water—Notes
NOTES
1. U.S. EPA. 1998. Clean Water Action Plan: Restoring and Protecting America's Waters. Washington, DC:
Government Printing Office.
2. Travel Industry Association of America. 2002. Tourism Works for America, llth Edition. Washington, DC:
Travel Industry of America.
3. Pew Oceans Commission. 2002. America's Living Oceans Charting a Course for Sea Change. Arlington, VA:
Pew Oceans Commission.
4. Use of the terms "Indian country," "Indian lands," "tribal land," "tribal waters," and "tribal areas" within this
Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is
their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.
7. U.S. EPA. 2002. The Clean Water and Drinking Water Infrastructure Gap Analysis. Washington, DC:
Government Printing Office.
8. United Nations. 2002. Report of the World Summit on Sustainable Development: Johannesburg, South Africa,
26 August - 4 September, 2002. New York, NY: United Nations.
9. U.S. EPA, Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology. National Listing of Fish and Wildlife Advisories.
Washington, DC. Available online at http://mapl.epa.gov. Access: May 1, 2003.
10. U.S. EPA, April 19, 1994. Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Control Policy. Federal Register Vol. 59,
No. 75, page 18788.
11. Use of the terms "Indian country," "Indian lands," "tribal land," "tribal waters," and "tribal areas" within this
Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is
their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs.
12. Ibid.
13. U.S. EPA. June 2002. CWNIMS National Report. CWSRF Funds Available for Projects, Net Sources.
Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
14. Ibid.
15. The latest version of the ROE as well as information associated with the new ROE can be found at
www.epa.gov/indicators/index.htm.
16. U.S. EPA, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, Accessing Drinking Water Data in SDWIS/FED
(Safe Drinking Water Information System/Federal Version). Available online at www.epa.gov/safewater/data/
getdata.html.
-------
V
-------
Preservation
-i
Restoration
Preserve and restore the land by using
innovative waste management practices
and cleaning up contaminated properties
to reduce risks posed by releases of
harmful substances.
-------
The land preservation and restoration goal presents EPA's strategic
vision for managing waste, conserving and recovering the value
of wastes, preventing releases, responding to emergencies, and
cleaning up contaminated land. The stakes can be high because
uncontrolled wastes can cause acute illness or chronic disease and can harm
the environment. Cleanup almost always costs more than prevention, and
contaminated land can be a barrier to bringing jobs and revitalization to a
community. Disposed wastes also represent a loss of important material and
energy values,
EPA employs a hierarchy of approaches to protect the land, including
reducing waste at its source, recycling waste for materials or energy values,
managing waste effectively by preventing spills and releases of toxic materials, and cleaning up
contaminated properties. We are helping develop public-private partnerships to conserve resources in
key areas. Moreover, over the next 5 years, we will establish or update approved controls to prevent
dangerous releases at approximately 500 hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities and
also will address 2 longstanding tribal waste management concerns: increasing the number of tribes
covered by integrated waste management plans and cleaning up open dumps.
To reduce and control the risks posed by accidental and intentional releases of harmful substances,
we plan to maintain a high level of readiness to respond to emergencies, lead or oversee the response at
more than 1,600 hazardous waste removals and reduce by 25 percent the number of gallons of oil spilled
by facilities subject to Facility Response Plan regulations relative to previous levels. EPA and its
partners, and responsible parties will remediate contaminated land, reduce risk to the public, and
enable communities to return properties to beneficial reuse. We will also apply leading-edge scientific
research to improve our capability to assess conditions and determine relative risks posed by
contamination at hazardous waste sites.
Susan Parker Bodine
Assistant Administrator
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
-------
GOAL 3:
Land Preservation
and Restoration
Uncontrolled, wastes released on the land can
migrate—contaminating drinking water, causing illness
or disease, and threatening healthy ecosystems. EPA is
working to minimize risks and to preserve and restore
land using the most effective waste management and
cleanup methods available. We rely
on a variety of strategies: reducing
waste at its source, recycling,
managing waste to prevent spills and
releases, and cleaning up contami-
nated property. We are especially
concerned about threats to our most
sensitive populations: children, the
elderly, and people with chronic
diseases.
OBJECTIVES
Objective 3.1
Land .
Preserve
.62
Objective 32: Restore
Land .
.67
Objective 3.3: Enhance
Science and Research .
The Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA)1 and the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA
or Superfund)2 provide the legal authority for most of
EPAs work to preserve and restore the land. We use
Superfund authority to clean up uncontrolled or aban-
doned hazardous waste sites and return land to
productive use. Under RCRA, we work in partnership
with states and tribes to address risks
associated with leaking underground storage tanks and
generation and management of hazardous and
non-hazardous wastes. Tribal governments are the
primary parties for setting standards, making environmen-
tal policy decisions, and managing programs consistent with
federal standards and regulations for reservations, and our
regional offices work directly with them as the recognized
independent authorities for reservation affairs.
We also use authorities provided
under the Clean Air Act,3 Clean
Water Act,4 and Oil Pollution Act of
19905 to protect against spills and
releases of hazardous materials.
Controlling the many risks posed by
accidental and intentional releases of
harmful substances presents a signifi-
cant challenge. To minimize these
risks, EPA integrates prevention, pre-
paredness, and response efforts. We
conduct spill-prevention activities to
keep harmful substances from being
released to the environment. And we continue to
improve our readiness to respond and minimize contami-
nation and harm to the environment when spills do occur
by coordinating with our partners at all levels of govern-
ment, developing clear authorities,
training personnel, and providing proper equipment.
EPA is committed to ensuring environmental justice for
all peopk, regardkss of race, color, national origin, or
income. Recognizing that minority and/or low-income
communities frequently may be exposed disproportionately
.72
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
to environmental harm and risks, we work
through our land preservation and restoration
program to protect them and other burdened
communities from adverse human health and
environmental effects. We implement these
programs consistent with existing environ-
mental and civil rights laws and their
associated regulations, as well as the
Executive Order 12898, "Federal Actions
to Address Environmental justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations." Ensuring environmental justice
means not only protecting human health and
the environment for everyone, but also
making certain that all people are treated
fairly and given the opportunity to participate
meaningfully in making decisions that will
affect their health and communities.
OBJECTIVE 3.1: PRESERVE LAND
BY 2011, REDUCE ADVERSE EFFECTS TO LAND BY REDUCING WASTE GENERATION,
INCREASING RECYCLING, AND ENSURING PROPER MANAGEMENT OF WASTE AND
PETROLEUM PRODUCTS AT FACILITIES IN WAYS THAT PREVENT RELEASES.
Sub-objective 3.1.1: Reduce Waste
Generation and Increase Recycling. By
2011, reduce materials use through product
and process design, and increase materials
and energy recovery from wastes otherwise
requiring disposal.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, increase reuse and recycling
of construction and demolition debris
by 6 percent from a baseline of
59 percent in 2003.
• By 2011, increase the use of coal
combustion ash to 50 percent from
32 percent in 2001.
• By 2011, increase by 118 the number
of tribes covered by an integrated
waste management plan compared to
FY 2006.
• By 2011, close, clean up, or upgrade
138 open dumps in Indian country6
and on other tribal lands7 compared
to FY 2006.
Sub-objective 3.1.2: Manage Hazardous
Wastes and Petroleum Products Properly.
By 2011, reduce releases to the environment
by managing hazardous wastes and petroleum
products properly.
Strategic Targets
By 2011, prevent releases at 500
RCRA hazardous waste management
facilities by implementing initial
approved controls or updated con-
trols. (The universe of facilities will
be reassessed in FY 2009. However,
we currently estimate that there will
be about 820 facilities that will
require these controls. The goal of
500 represents about 60 percent of
the universe of 820 facilities.)
By 2011, increase the percentage
of UST facilities that are in signifi-
cant operational compliance with
both release and detection and
release prevention requirements to
71 percent from 66 percent in 2006
-------
Land Preservation and Restoration—Objective 3.1: Preserve Land
(an increase of 5 percent) out of a
total estimated universe of approxi-
mately 245,000 facilities.
Each year through 2011, minimize
the number of confirmed releases at
UST facilities to 10,000 or fewer
from a universe of approximately
650,000 UST tanks.
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
PRESERVING LAND
In setting goals for conserving resources
and managing waste under our Resource
Conservation Challenge Program, EPA
has high aspirations for our nation. We are
striving for a future when materials once con-
sidered wastes suitable only for landfills will
be continually reused and recycled, when
"industrial ecology" will be the mantra of
corporate executives across the nation, and
when our landfills will become obsolete.8 To
lead this move toward sustainability, we are
establishing a national challenge to recycle
40 percent of our municipal solid waste by
2011.9 Meeting this challenge will take the
combined efforts of all levels of government,
large and small businesses, and dedicated
citizens. It will mean that we have reached a
milestone on the path to a future when we
produce no waste at all.
We will work with stakeholders to establish
effective strategic targets that benchmark and
quantify our environmental progress toward
sustainable resource conservation. These
targets will provide a vivid picture of the signif-
icant environmental and economic benefits of
reducing, reusing, and recycling materials.
Under our Resource Conservation Challenge,
we have set new targets for recycling construc-
tion and demolition debris and for using coal
combustion ash rather than disposing of it. In
the coming years, we will focus on developing a
target or targets that contribute to the national
40 percent municipal solid waste recycling
challenge, and we will be developing broader
measures that capture the benefit of our
resource conservation efforts. (As EPA makes
the transition to new measures, we will
maintain the goal of recycling 35 percent of
municipal solid waste by 2008.)
©EPA
WISE
Preserving Resources,
Preventing Waste
C¥
COAL COMBUSTION
PRODUCTS PARTNERSHIP
ESTABLISHING
AND EXPANDING
PARTNERSHIPS
We are
establishing and
expanding
partnerships with
industry, states,
and other entities
to reduce waste
generation and
develop and
deliver tools
that will help
businesses, manu-
facturers, and
consumers prevent waste and increase recy-
cling. Our WasteWise and Coal Combustion
Products Partnership programs, for example,
capitalize on voluntary efforts to reduce waste
and increase recycling and serve as models for
new alliances between agencies, industries,
and businesses.
For more information go to:
www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/reduce/
wastewise/about/index.htm and www.epa.gov/
epaoswer/osw/conserve/c2p2/index.htm.
We will continue to support our tribal
partners in improving practices for managing
solid waste on Indian lands.10 EPA is responsi-
ble for implementing RCRA hazardous waste
and UST programs directly in Indian country.
Recognizing the challenges unique to tribal
lands, we will work with tribes on a govern-
ment-to-government basis in a way that
affirms our federal trust responsibility to the
572 federally-recognized tribal governments
and acknowledges the importance of conserv-
ing natural resources for cultural uses. To
upgrade tribes solid waste management
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
infrastructure, we will continue to work with
them to develop integrated waste management
plans, codes, ordinances, recycling programs,
and alternatives to open dumping. Through
these efforts, we will help to clean up existing
dumps, reducing the risks they pose to human
health and the environment. A municipal
solid waste landfill is considered to be an
"open dump" if it does not meet EPA's
Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Criteria, and
is considered "upgraded" when modified so
that it meets such criteria.11 Over the next
5 years, EPA will build on the work of the
National Interagency Workgroup, which
annually contributes funding to the Solid
Waste Assistance Grant Program for tribes,
and we will forge partnerships with other
federal agencies to identify and resolve waste
problems in Indian country and on other
tribal lands.
STIMULATING INFRASTRUCTURE
DEVELOPMENT, PRODUCT STEWARDSHIP,
AND NEW TECHNOLOGIES
A key strategy for reducing waste is
developing infrastructure that will make it
easier for industry, businesses, and consumers
to reduce the waste they generate, to acquire
and use recycled materials, and to purchase
products containing recycled materials. We
will continue to promote development of new
and expanded markets for recycled materials
and new and better recycling technologies. In
addressing municipal solid waste, we will
focus on specific commodity streams—paper,
organics, containers, packaging, and electron-
ics—which offer great potential for recycling.
The carpets and electronics sectors, for
example, present promising opportunities for
collaboration because key industries and
states recognize the environmental benefits
to be derived from reducing waste.
Similarly, our new GreenScapes partnership
www.epa.gov/greenscapes will increase
end-markets for compost while teaching
homeowners how to save time, money, and
natural resources by reducing and recycling
their yard wastes.
EPA also is working with tribes to
increase recycling and composting at large,
public venues such as tribally-owned and
operated casinos, shopping centers, and
amphitheaters. "Recycling on the Go"12
projects in such locations can prevent
recyclable and compostable materials from
reaching landfills. Such projects also promote
partnerships and build strong working
relationships between EPA, tribes, and
local governments.
We will continue to promote recycling of
industrial by-products, concentrating on
three large-quantity material streams: coal
combustion products, construction and demo-
lition debris, and foundry sands. Our Coal
Combustion Products Partnership
(www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/conserve/c2p2/
index.htm) will prevent waste by encouraging
the beneficial use of coal combustion prod-
ucts. EPA's construction initiative
(www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/conserve/
priorities/bene-use.htm) will foster recycling
of industrial materials, including construction
and demolition debris, in major transporta-
tion and building construction projects.
Through the Green Highways Initiative
(http://www.greenhighways.org/), we will
collaborate with government, business, and
-------
Land Preservation and Restoration—Objective 3.1: Preserve Land
industry to reuse industrial materials for
transportation sector needs; reduce, reuse,
and recycle municipal solid waste; and con-
sider options for "green procurement." And
we will continue working with the foundry
industry to encourage recycling of spent
foundry sands and develop a numerical goal
to quantify these efforts.
EPA will also promote new and better
recycling technologies and ways to obtain
energy or products from waste. For example,
through bioreactor technology, which acceler-
ates stabilization of municipal solid waste, the
collection of landfill gases containing methane
offers promise as a source of energy. We will
continue to support initiatives that revamp
technologies to reduce or eliminate the use of
virgin materials, recover energy to produce
power, and improve waste management.
PROVIDING EDUCATION, OUTREACH,
TRAINING, AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
As a result of EPA's continuing outreach to
nonprofit organizations, major retailers,
electronics manufacturers, and other industries,
messages on conservation, waste prevention,
and recycling have become more prevalent.
These messages increase public awareness of
waste disposal issues, encouraging consumers,
young people, and underserved communities
to make smarter, more responsible environ-
mental choices. We will work with our
partners to encourage students and teachers
to begin innovative recycling programs, and
we will develop unique tools and projects to
promote waste reduction, recycling, and
neighborhood revitalization in Hispanic and
African-American communities and on
Indian lands. By funding training programs
and providing resources for tribal employees,
EPA will continue to support the develop-
ment of tribal waste management programs,
including adequate and recently-approved,
integrated solid waste management plans,
community education and outreach, and
other cleanup activities.
ADDRESSING GLOBAL CONCERNS
THROUGH PARTNERSHIPS
Because waste management and recycling
of paper, plastics, and electronics have
become increasingly global enterprises,
"Global Environment" is a core priority in
EPA's Action Plan (www.epa.gov/adminweb/
administrator/actionplan.htm). EPA waste
management programs will continue working
with other countries and international agen-
cies to devise efficient, rational solutions and
voluntary and regulatory initiatives to protect
the global environment.
Through our membership on the
Commission for Environmental Cooperation's
Hazardous Waste Task Force, EPA will pro-
mote the safe handling of waste imports and
exports among North American Free Trade
Agreement countries. This work will improve
tracking of transboundary hazardous waste
shipments, strengthen compliance, enhance
border security, and reduce administrative
burden and costs to private and government
agencies in the United States and abroad.
Under the U.S.-Mexico Border 2012 Plan
(http://www.epa.gov/usmexicoborder/
intro.htm), EPA will work with Mexican
authorities to clean up and prevent tire piles
and remediate contaminated sites along the
border. In other international efforts, we will
work with the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development to minimize
waste generation, remove barriers to recy-
cling, and streamline exports and imports of
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
hazardous waste
recyclables;13 work
with a global public-
private partnership
under the Basel
Convention to
enhance the design,
collection, reuse,
and recycling of
mobile phones; and,
under the auspices
of the International
Maritime Organiza-
tion's environmental committee, participate
in negotiations (through 2009) to develop a
new international convention for the safe
and environmentally sound dismantling and
recycling of ships.
MANAGING HAZARDOUS WASTES
AND PETROLEUM PRODUCTS
A key element of EPA's strategy for
managing hazardous wastes that must be
treated, stored, or disposed is making waste
management facilities more efficient.
Working with our state, tribal, and local
government partners, we are focusing on
permitting processes and improving permit-
ting conditions where appropriate. EPA will
continue to work with authorized states—
particularly those with a large number of
facilities lacking initial approved controls—to
remove obstacles to obtaining permits or put-
ting other approved controls in
place and to transfer successful
strategies from other states.
Today, while the vast majori-
ty of the approximately 650,000
active USTs have the required
leak detection and other equip-
ment in place, significant work
remains to ensure that UST own-
ers and operators maintain and
operate their systems properly.14
RCRA Subtitle I allows state
UST programs approved by EPA
to operate in lieu of the federal program, and
EPA recognizes that the number and diversity
of UST systems puts state authorities in the
best position to
regulate USTs and set program priorities.15
As a result, even states that have not
received formal state program approval from
EPA are most often the primary implement-
ing agencies and receive annual grants from
EPA. We will continue to support state
programs; strengthen partnerships among
stakeholders; and provide technical assis-
tance, compliance assistance, and training to
promote and enforce UST facility compli-
ance. We will work with states on innovative
approaches and outreach and education
tools designed to bring more tanks into
compliance.
The Energy Policy Act, which focuses on
preventing releases to keep our nation's land
and water safe, will require major changes to
federal and state UST programs. The Energy
Policy Act extends the LUST Trust Fund tax
through 2011; and includes provisions regard-
ing inspections, operator training, delivery
prohibition, secondary containment, financial
responsibility, and cleanup of releases that
contain oxygenated fuel additives. EPA and
states will work closely with tribes, other fed-
eral agencies, tank owners and operators, and
other stakeholders to bring about the man-
dated changes affecting UST facilities,
ultimately increasing compliance and
preventing UST releases.
-------
Land Preservation and Restoration—Objective 3.2: Restore Land
OBJECTIVE 3.2: RESTORE LAND
BY 2011, CONTROL THE RISKS TO HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY MITIGATING
THE IMPACT OF ACCIDENTAL OR INTENTIONAL RELEASES AND BY CLEANING UP AND
RESTORING CONTAMINATED SITES OR PROPERTIES TO APPROPRIATE LEVELS.
Sub-objective 3.2.1: Prepare for and
Respond to Accidental and Intentional
Releases. By 2011, reduce and control the
risks posed by accidental and intentional
releases of harmful substances by improving
our nation's capability to prevent, prepare
for, and respond more effectively to these
emergencies.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, achieve and maintain at
least 95 percent of the maximum
score on readiness evaluation criteria
in each region.
• By 2011, complete an additional 975
Superfund-lead hazardous substance
removal actions. (In FY 2005, 175 of
these actions were completed.)
• By 2011, oversee and complete an
additional 650 voluntary removal
actions. (In FY 2005, 137 of these
actions were completed.)
• By 2011, reduce by 25 percent the
gallons of oil spilled by facilities sub-
ject to Facility Response Plan
regulations relative to the 601,000
gallons of oil spilled in 2003.
• By 2011, inspect (and ensure compli-
ance at) 90 percent of the estimated
4,200 facilities subject to Facility
Response Plan regulations, up from
50 percent in 2004.
Sub-objective 3.2.2: Clean Up and
Revitalize Contaminated Land. By 2011,
control the risks to human health and the
environment at contaminated properties or
sites through cleanup, stabilization, or other
action and make land available for reuse.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, make final assessment
decisions at 40,491 of 44,700 poten-
tially hazardous waste sites evaluated
by EPA to help resolve community
concerns on whether these sites
require long-term cleanup to protect
public health and the environment
and to help determine if they can be
cleared for possible redevelopment.
(By the end of FY 2005, a total of
38,770 final site assessment decisions
had been made.)
• By 2011, control all identified
unacceptable human exposures from
site contamination for current land
and/or groundwater use conditions at
approximately 85 percent (1,316) of
1,543 Superfund human exposure
sites. (The universe of 1,543 is the
number of National Priorities List
[NPL] sites with potential human
exposure pathways as of FY 2005 and
includes 172 Superfund federal facility
sites. Baseline: By the end of
FY 2006, approximately 82 percent
[1,266] of sites had human exposures
under control.) By 2011, increase
to 95 percent the high National
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
-•j
Corrective Action Prioritization
System (NCAPS)-ranked RCRA
facilities with human exposures to
toxins controlled. (The universe of all
facilities that need RCRA Corrective
Action will be finalized by the end of
2007 and will include high, medium,
and low ranked facilities.)16
By 2011, control the migration of
contaminated groundwater through
engineered remedies, natural processes,
or other appropriate actions at
74 percent (1,017) of 1,381
Superfund groundwater sites. (The
universe of 1,381 sites is the number of
NPL sites with groundwater contami-
nation as of FY 2005 and includes 166
Superfund federal facility sites.
Baseline: By the end of FY 2005,
68 percent [937] of sites had ground-
water migration under control.)
By 2011, increase to 80 percent the
high NCAPS-ranked RCRA facilities
with migration of contaminated
groundwater under control. (The
universe of all facilities that need
RCRA Corrective Action will be
finalized by the end of 2007 and will
include high, medium, and low
ranked facilities.)17
• By 2011, reduce the backlog of
LUST cleanups (confirmed releases
that have yet to be cleaned up)
that do not meet state risk-based
standards for human exposure
and groundwater migration from
26 percent to 21 percent. By 2011,
increase to 22 percent the RCRA
facilities with final remedies con-
structed. (The universe of all facilities
that need RCRA Corrective Action
will be finalized by the end of 2007
and will include high, medium, and
low ranked facilities.)18 By 2011,
complete construction of remedies at
approximately 76 percent (1,171) of
1,547 Superfund sites. (The universe
of 1,547 sites is the total number of
sites on the NPL as of FY 2005 and
includes 172 Superfund federal facil-
ity sites. Baseline: By the end of
FY 2005, 62 percent or 966 sites had
completed construction.) (Note that
construction completion is a mile-
stone which indicates that all
significant construction activity has
been completed, even though addi-
tional remediation may be needed
for all cleanup goals to be met.)
• By 2011, ensure that 36 percent
(345) of 966 final and deleted con-
struction complete NPL sites are
ready for reuse site-wide. (As of
July 2006, 20 percent [195] of the
966 final and deleted construction
complete NPL sites, including 14
Superfund federal facility sites,
met EPA's definition for ready for
reuse site-wide.)
Sub-objective 3.2.3: Maximize Potential
Responsible Party Participation at
Superfund Sites. Through 2011, conserve
federal resources by ensuring that potentially
responsible parties conduct or pay for
Superfund cleanups whenever possible.
-------
Land Preservation and Restoration—Objective 3.2: Restore Land
Strategic Targets
Each year through 2011, reach a
settlement or take an enforcement
action before the start of a remedial
action at 95 percent of Superfund sites
having viable, liable responsible parties
other than the federal government.
Each year through 2011, address all
unaddressed costs in statute of limita-
tions cases for sites with unaddressed
total past Superfund costs equal to or
greater than $200,000.
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
RESTORING LAND
EPA leads the federal effort to reduce risks
posed by contaminated land by responding to
releases and potential releases of harmful sub-
stances and undertaking cleanups and other
activities to return land to beneficial use.
We develop and implement prevention
measures, improve response capabilities, ensure
that response and cleanup actions are effective,
and promote protective, sustainable, and
productive uses of formerly contaminated
properties. We collaborate with private
organizations, communities, businesses,
and government agencies at every level to
accomplish these ends. We also work to
increase public understanding of environmen-
tal issues and develop a sense of
environmental stewardship for land
that has been returned to beneficial use.
PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE
National preparedness is essential to
ensure that emergency responders are able to
deal with multiple, large-scale emergencies,
including those that may involve chemicals,
oil, biological agents, radiation, or weapons of
mass destruction. EPA will continue to
enhance its core emergency response program
by providing specialized training on the
Incident Command System; developing
additional health and safety materials; partici-
pating in exercises with federal, state, and
local government agencies, including
Regional Response Teams; and strengthening
response readiness across multiple regions.
We also are working to improve coordi-
nation and communication. For example, as
part of the National Incident Coordination
Team, we will continue to improve mecha-
nisms for coordinating responses to national
emergencies. Under the Continuity of
Operations/Continuity of Government pro-
gram, we will upgrade and test plans,
facilities, training, and equipment to ensure
that essential government business can
continue during a catastrophic emergency.
And we will expand our National Response
Team capabilities for coordinating large-scale
responses with the Department of Homeland
Security; Federal Emergency Management
Agency; Federal Bureau of Investigation;
and other federal, state, and local govern-
ment agencies.
We also are
improving our capabil-
ity for responding to
incidents involving
harmful chemical, oil,
biological, and radio-
logical substances.
Each year, EPA
personnel assess,
respond to, mitigate,
and clean up thou-
sands of releases—
whether accidental,
deliberate, or naturally
occurring. These
range from small
spills at chemical or
oil facilities to larger
accidental releases in
train and highway
accidents, and from
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
natural disasters, such as hurricanes Katrina
and Rita, to national emergencies, such as
terrorist events. Over the next 2 years, we
will expand our current core emergency
response program to address prevention and
preparedness and cover all aspects of emer-
gency environmental management.
An important component of our land
strategy is preventing oil spills and being pre-
pared for spills that do occur so that oil does
not reach our nation's waters. Under the Oil
Pollution Act,19 we require certain facilities
to develop Facility Response Plans (FRPs)
for use in the event of a spill and to
practice implementing them. At the
end of FY 2004, EPA had inspected (and
found in compliance) 50 percent of the esti-
mated 4,200 FRP facilities; over the next
5 years we will work to ensure at least
90 percent compliance.
CLEANING UP AND REVITALIZING
CONTAMINATED SITES
EPA's cleanup programs strive to protect
Americans from risks posed by contaminated
land; restore the nation's contaminated land;
and enable communities safely to return these
properties to beneficial economic, ecological,
and social use. We work with our federal,
state, tribal, and local government partners
to identify sites and facilities that need
attention and collaborate to clean them up.
EPA's One Cleanup Program is a long-term
initiative that encourages our cleanup programs
to work together and with all levels of govern-
ment to ensure that appropriate cleanup tools
are used; resources and activities are
coordinated; results are effectively communi-
cated to the public; and cleanups are
protective and contribute to revitalizing com-
munities, including those with environmental
justice concerns. We will strive to treat peo-
ple fairly, to provide equal opportunity for
participating in cleanup decisions, and to
ensure that no population bears a dispropor-
tionate burden or risk. The One Cleanup
Program reflects our effort to coordinate all of
EPA cleanup programs, yet provides the flexi-
bility to accommodate different statutory
authorities and approaches.
All of our cleanup programs include com-
mon elements: initial assessment, stabilization
(when needed to control actual or potential
exposure and protect local populations), site
investigation, selection of appropriate site
remedies, implementation and completion of
remedies, and promotion of protective
uses/reuses.
Investigating and Assessing Sites. With our
partners, we identify the type and extent of
contamination and the actual or potential
exposure to people and environmental recep-
tors. We use the data we collect to determine
risks and to select remedies. To better address
environmental justice concerns and identify
areas that may suffer disproportionate
impacts, we will encourage broader use of
improved sample collection techniques,
analytical tools, and indicators.
Selecting and Implementing Remedies.
We select remedies based on such criteria as
affected media (soil, air, groundwater, etc.),
cleanup objectives, compliance with applicable
laws, implementation issues, and acceptability
to state and tribal governments and the affect-
ed communities. Cost and efficiency
of the overall cleanup process are also
important. When remedies involve leaving
contamination in place, EPA will continue
-------
Land Preservation and Restoration—Objective 3.2: Restore Land
to include institutional controls, such as
notices and easements, to prevent
inappropriate uses of the land or water and
unacceptable exposures.
Completing Construction and
Post-Construction. Once appropriate remedies
have been selected, completing construction
of all remedies at a site or facility is an impor-
tant milestone for EPA's cleanup programs.
For example, the RCRA program has devel-
oped a long-term goal of implementing and
completing construction of final remedies at
95 percent of all facilities that need RCRA
corrective action by 2020,20 and we will be
developing interim annual targets (such as
our 2011 target of 22 percent) to measure
progress toward this goal.21
The Superfund program conducts reviews
every 5 years to ensure that the remedy is
functioning as intended and remains protec-
tive. Given the many sites moving into the
post-construction-completion stage, we
will implement a strategy to manage post-
construction-completion activities and ensure
that response actions will protect human
health and the environment for the long
term (PCC Strategy www.epa.gov/
superfund/action/postconstruction).
A key milestone for all cleanup programs
is the point at which all cleanup goals for a
particular remedy or an entire site/facility are
achieved. This can mean that no contamina-
tion is left above levels of concern and that
the land has no restrictions on its use or that
site-specific goals that allow restricted uses of
the property have been met. EPA's cleanup
programs have set a national goal of returning
formerly contaminated sites to long-term,
sustainable, and productive use. EPA
will continue to foster revitalization
(www.epa.gov/oswer/landrevitalization/) by
developing policies and systems for the safe
long-term use of remediated land; identifying
and removing unintended barriers to benefi-
cial reuse of contaminated properties;
working with the marketplace to make for-
merly contaminated properties commercially
attractive; and developing revitalization
measures and indicators for all EPA cleanup
programs.
MAXIMIZING POTENTIALLY
RESPONSIBLE PARTY PARTICIPATION
AT SUPERFUND SITES
Under Superfund Program enforcement
authorities, EPA leverages private party
resources to conduct cleanup actions and to
reimburse the federal government for federally
financed cleanups. We will continue to
pursue two strategies for conserving federal
funds: "Enforcement First" and cost recovery.
Under the Enforcement First strategy, EPA
takes enforcement actions at sites where
viable, liable potentially responsible parties
exist, requiring them to pay for or perform
the cleanups. To ensure that these parties are
able to meet their cleanup obligations, EPA
developed a national strategy to assess com-
panies' compliance with federal financial
assurance requirements and will implement it
over the next several years.
Cost recovery is another way to leverage
private party resources. Superfund provides
EPA the authority to compel private parties
to pay back federal money spent to conduct
cleanup activities.22 We will continue to
address 100 percent of the unaddressed past
costs for statute of limitations cases at sites
with unaddressed total past Superfund costs
equal to or greater than $200,000 and to
report the value of costs recovered.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
OBJECTIVE 3.3: ENHANCE SCIENCE AND RESEARCH
THROUGH 2011, PROVIDE AND APPLY SOUND SCIENCE FOR PROTECTING AND
RESTORING LAND BY CONDUCTING LEADING-EDGE RESEARCH, WHICH, THROUGH
COLLABORATION, LEADS TO PREFERRED ENVIRONMENTAL OUTCOMES.
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
ENHANCING SCIENCE AND RESEARCH
EPA will continue to improve its capabil-
ity to assess environmental conditions and
determine the relative risks that contaminat-
ed land poses to health and the environment.
We will ensure that the environmental data
we collect are of known, documented, and
acceptable quality by implementing necessary
field and lab procedures, practices, and
controls. We will continue to integrate tech-
nological advances to enhance our site
investigation capabilities, implement cost-
effective remedies, and improve the operation
and maintenance of existing remedies. In
addition, we will continue to coordinate with
other agencies on our land research priorities.
EPA scientists are developing methods
for assessing multimedia risks, including
the Multimedia, Multipathway, and Multi-
receptor Risk Assessment (3MRA) modeling
system to support the Hazardous Waste
Identification Rule. As a part of this effort,
EPA will be conducting research to provide a
preliminary risk screening for electronics
waste and better understand the risks posed
by hazardous constituents during
recycling operations, disposal, or component
reuse. The 3MRA model will also evaluate
on a national basis relative risks of various
waste disposal options for use in regulatory
decision making. We have also planned
research that targets specific materials for
volume reduction and others for reuse and
conservation.
To support cradle-to-cradle materials man-
agement, EPA scientists will evaluate landfill
caps to improve containment technologies and
conduct research on operating landfills as
bioreactors. This research addresses operation
and monitoring parameters and evaluates
such risks as increased fugitive emissions. We
will incorporate our findings in the training
and technology transfer materials we provide
to state permitting officials.
EPA's land research program helps accel-
erate scientifically defensible, cost-effective
cleanup decisions at complex sites, in accor-
dance with CERCLA. We are targeting our
research to make measurable progress in
managing material streams, conserving
resources, and managing waste and in miti-
gating and managing contaminated sites.
Toward these ends, we will focus research
on contaminated sediments, ground water con-
tamination, site characterization, and technical
support to reduce uncertainties in assessing
contaminated sediments and develop and
evaluate options for remediation. We are
investigating sediment remedies with the
potential to be more cost-effective than
conventional dredging or capping remedies.
-------
Land Preservation and Restoration—Human Capital
Research will also focus on bioremediation of
organics, electrochemical degradation, and
conventional and reactive landfill caps.
To identify and explore best management
practices, we will work with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and the Strategic
Environmental Research and Development
Program on a number of research projects to
evaluate the field performance of dredging
and capping of sediments.
We will continue ground water
research—stressing ground water remediation
of inorganic plumes and ground water-surface
water assessment strategies—to develop appli-
cations for permeable reactive barriers and
address fate and transport and treatment
methods for contaminants. Our research on
dense nonaqueous phase liquids (DNAPL)
source remediation focuses on demonstrating,
evaluating, and optimizing DNAPL remedia-
tion technologies; assessing and predicting
the benefits of
partial DNAPL
depletion; and
developing and
assessing integrat-
ed DNAPL source
remediation
approaches. Our
technical support
centers will
continue to pro-
vide site-specific
assistance.
Our research to support the LUST pro-
gram will provide fate and transport studies
and information on the effectiveness of reme-
diation alternatives. Research on fate and
transport and risk management strategies for
petroleum and non-petroleum oil spills will
support EPA and its partners in responding to
oil spill emergencies.
HUMAN CAPITAL
EPA's emergency prevention, prepared-
ness, and response staff are key to the
Agency's ability to preserve and restore land.
We will continue to ensure their readiness
and protect their health and safety when
responding to releases of dangerous materials
or cleaning up contamination by providing
annual on-scene coordinator readiness train-
ing conferences, specialized Incident
Command System training, health and safety
materials, and exercises with federal, state,
and local government agencies. We will also
enhance the capabilities of our workforce by
acquiring and maintaining appropriate
response equipment, providing experience
with routine cleanup operations, and pre-
deploying responders for national special
security events. EPA's Superfund response
program will develop and maintain the skill
base needed to achieve its goals through
numerous training and enhancement
programs focusing on needs identified in its
competency gap analysis.
EPA's RCRA national waste management,
waste minimization and recycling, and
cleanup programs rely on a cadre of technical-
ly adept and program management-oriented
people. Within the RCRA program, our
development efforts include state-of-the-art
technical training and focus on maintaining a
superior level of competency in areas such as
project management, communications, and
other skills. These competencies are necessary
to support our work with the vast array of
public and private sector partners who are
interested in waste and materials manage-
ment. Our recruiting efforts have been
particularly successful in bringing on high
quality staff at the entry level to help us build
a core group of seasoned employees who are
ready to assume future leadership roles.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
To support our national goal of returning
formerly contaminated sites to sustainable
and productive use, all of EPA's cleanup pro-
grams are developing new measures of
revitalization. As a first step, the Superfund
program has set a "site ready for reuse" target
to demonstrate cleanup progress. This meas-
ure tracks National Priority List sites where
construction of the remedy is complete;
where cleanup goals in the Record of
Decision have been achieved such that there
are no unacceptable risks associated with cur-
rent and reasonably anticipated future uses;
and where all institutional controls required
in the Record of Decision have been imple-
mented. These measures will capture the total
number and acreage of sites for which EPA
has some level of accountability, the number
of sites and acres EPA has determined to be
ready for reuse (or protective of existing
uses), and whether and how the sites are
being used (for industrial, commercial,
residential, or other purposes).
To track our
annual progress
toward our
research objec-
tives, we will use
a number of
objective meas-
ures of customer
satisfaction, prod-
uct impact and
quality, and effi-
ciency. For
example, we rely
on independent
expert review
panel ratings,
client surveys on the usefulness of our prod-
ucts, and analyses demonstrating the actual
use of EPA research products.
Most of the strategic targets established
for the waste management, UST, and
Superfund programs are based on the long-
term, outcome-oriented measures developed
for use in the Office of Management and
Budget's (OMB) Program Assessment Rating
Tool (PART) assessments.
As a result of the self-evaluation we
conducted during the FY 2005 OMB
PART process, the Superfund program:
(1) enhanced a key outcome measure to bet-
ter communicate progress towards long-term
human health; (2) added a new measure to
reflect the lasting effects of land cleanup and
restoration; (3) improved reporting on annual
and long-term performance data to ensure
accountability; and (4) implemented a new
program review process and conducted its
first benchmarking study to seek improved
performance, effectiveness and efficiencies,
and protection. The OMB PART for the Oil
Removal Program led to new measures and
related targets, as well as a commitment to
develop a second long-term outcome measure
and at least one annual outcome measure.
IMPROVING PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
As we considered revisions and improve-
ments for this Strategic Plan, we also
conducted a preliminary assessment of longer-
term opportunities to better articulate
strategic, outcome-oriented commitments.
For our land goal, we identified four themes
to help guide our efforts to improve our meas-
ures: extent of contaminated land; extent of
land restored to potential use; extent of
previously contaminated land in productive
use; and impacts of waste-management efforts
on human and environmental condition.
These themes will help guide our efforts to
improve our measures of performance.
-------
Land Preservation and Restoration—Using Feedback from Performance Assessments and Program Evaluations
USING FEEDBACK FROM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS
AND PROGRAM EVALUATIONS
In undertaking the PART process, the
Superfund Program made several new com-
mitments. It will encourage continuous
improvement by strengthening its strategic
planning—initiating regular procedures to
track and document key decisions and
work products. To improve the accuracy
and reliability of its performance informa-
tion, the program will evaluate the quality
of data from key sources. Finally, the
Superfund program will create a forum that
allows regional offices to share best prac-
tices, resulting in an overall improvement
in program performance and efficiency.
In July 2004, EPA's Science Advisory
Board (SAB) conducted an advisory
review of our Contaminated Sites and
RCRA Multiyear Plans. The Board found
the plans to be "programmatically and
scientifically sound" and noted "the remark-
able coordination of the program's research
with that of the relevant program offices
and other institutions" and "the judicious
use of leveraging opportunities to signifi-
cantly stretch limited resources to meet
more of the Agency's needs." In response to
SAB recommendations, the research pro-
gram combined the two multiyear plans into
one document and more clearly linked
research activities to program activities
under Objectives 3.1 and 3.2.
The SAB also reviewed the 3MRA
modeling system and reported its findings in
November 2004. EPA is addressing the
Board's recommendations by continuing to
develop 3MRA modeling system validation
protocols, modeling system evaluation, and
additional uncertainty analysis.
EMERGING ISSUES AND EXTERNAL FACTORS
A number of emerging technologies
present potentially important implications for
waste management strategies and programs.
Waste to Energy, a technology which uses
waste materials that are unlikely to be
recycled as feedstock for energy production,
has significant implications for energy supply.
Research is also being conducted on applying
nanotechnology to remediate hazardous waste
sites. Using nanomaterials for remediation
could enable more rapid or cost-effective
cleanups than do current conventional
approaches. (More information is available in
the external peer review draft of EPA's White
Paper on Nanotechnology at www.epa.gov/
osa/nanotech.htm.)
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
Our ability to respond as the federal
on-scene coordinator for releases of harmful
substances in the inland zone may be affect-
ed by several external factors. The National
Response System ensures that EPA will
respond when necessary, but relies heavily
on the ability of responsible parties and
state, local, and tribal agencies to respond to
most emergencies. The need for EPA to
respond is a function of the quantity and
severity of spills that occur, as well as the
capacity of state, local, and tribal agencies to
address spills.
EPA's ability to respond to homeland secu-
rity incidents is affected by circumstances
surrounding each event. For instance, if travel
or communication is severely impeded, our
response may be delayed or less efficient. In
the case of a single large-scale incident, our
resources are likely to be concentrated on
that response, reducing our ability to address
other emergency releases that may occur. In
severe cases, our current emergency response
workforce and resources may not be sufficient
to address simultaneous large-scale incidents.
A number of external factors could also
substantially affect our ability to achieve our
objectives for cleanup and prevention. These
include our reliance on private-party response
and state and tribal partnerships, new
environmental technologies, other federal
agencies' efforts, and statutory barriers.
Because states are primarily responsible for
implementing the RCRA Hazardous Waste
and UST programs, our ability to achieve our
goals depends on the strength and funding of
state programs. Similarly, our success in
meeting our goals for compliance depends
on a strong state presence.
The Superfund Program was intended to
provide permanent site solutions to the
extent practicable. Complications can arise,
however, when new scientific information
suggests that cleanup decisions were based
on outdated risk assessments. As appropriate,
the Superfund Program must incorporate
emerging science into decision making while
maintaining its commitment to provide
permanent solutions.
Achieving our waste reduction and
recycling objectives will depend on federal,
state, tribal, local government, industry, and
public participation in partnerships to reduce
waste generation and increase recycling. EPA
provides national leadership to encourage these
partnerships and to promote the campaign to
reduce or reuse waste that would ultimately be
sent for disposal. However, both domestic and
foreign economic stresses can adversely affect
markets for recovered materials.
Finally, we rely on our partnerships with
other federal agencies and tribal governments
to upgrade, clean up, or close open dumps in
Indian country and to provide tribes access to
information on modern waste management.
And to achieve our objectives for waste man-
agement on tribal lands, EPA will continue to
depend on cooperation and participation by
tribes and other federal agencies.
-------
Land Preservation and Restoration—Notes
1. 42 U.S. Code 6901-6992L
2. 42 U.S. Code 9601-9675.
3. 42 U.S. Code 7401-7671q.
4. 33 U.S. Code 12514387.
5. U.S. Code 2701-2761.
6. Use of the terms "Indian country," "Indian lands," "tribal lands," "tribal waters," and "tribal areas" within this
Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is
their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs.
7. Ibid.
8. Beyond RCRA: Waste and Materials Management in the Year 2020 (www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/vision.htm).
9. In the 2003-2008 Strategic Plan, EPA established a goal of 35 percent recycling of municipal solid waste by 2008.
EPA will continue to measure progress toward this goal through 2008.
10. Use of the terms "Indian country," "Indian lands," "tribal lands," "tribal waters," and "tribal areas" within this
Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is
their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs.
11. U.S. EPAs Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Criteria are defined in 40 CFR 257 and 258.
12. U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. Resource Conservation Challenge/Recycling on the
Go web site: www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/onthego/.
13. Core Performance Elements of the Guidelines for Environmentally Sound Management of Wastes,
April 24, 2003, Environment Policy Committee, OECD.
14. Memorandum from Cliff Rothenstein, Director, EPA Office of Underground Storage Tanks to Underground
Storage Tank Division Directors in EPA Regions 1-10, dated December 15, 2005. FY 2005 End'of'Year
Activity Report.
15. 42 U.S. Code 6901-6992L
16. The 2020 RCRA Corrective Action universe will include all facilities that need RCRA corrective action as
well as those on the current high-priority list, additional facilities that have a permitting obligation, and other
appropriate and important facilities identified by EPA regions and states.
17. Ibid.
18. Ibid.
19. 33 U.S. Code 2701-2761.
20. Beyond RCRA www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/vision.htm.
21. The 2020 RCRA Corrective Action universe will include all facilities that need RCRA corrective action as
well as those on the current high-priority list, additional facilities that have a permitting obligation, and other
appropriate and important facilities identified by EPA regions and states.
22. 42 U.S. Code 9601-9675.
-------
f '
»
-------
Healthy
Protect, sustain, or restore the
health of people, communities,
and ecosystems using integrated
and comprehensive approaches
and partnerships.
-------
Goal 4 encompasses EPA's strategic approach to protecting,
sustaining, or restoring the health of communities and ecosystems.
In pursuit of this goal, EPA brings together a variety of programs,
tools, and resources; creates strong partnerships with federal, state, tribal,
and local government agencies; and enlists the support of many
nongovernmental stakeholders.
With a mix of regulatory programs and partnership approaches the
Agency achieves results in ways that are efficient, innovative and
sustainable. A key component of Goal 4 is identifying, assessing, and
reducing the risks presented by the thousands of chemicals and pesticides
on which our society and economy have come to depend. EPA continues
to work collaboratively with other nations and international organizations
to identify, develop, and implement policy options to address global
environmental issues of mutual concern. Following this, EPA strives to build
a community's capability to make decisions that affect the environment,
EPA's efforts to share information and provide assistance offers the tools
needed to effectively address the myriad aspects of planned development or
redevelopment. These contributions are tailored to circumstances spanning
the issues of sensitive communities and international cooperation. In a
similar manner, EPA's ecosystem protection programs encompass a wide
range of approaches that address specific at-risk regional areas, such as large
waterbodies. EPA also works with partners to protect larger categories of
threatened systems, such as estuaries and wetlands. In cooperation with the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, EPA will assure "no net loss" of wetlands.
Science guides EPA's identification and treatment of emerging issues and
advances our understanding of long-standing human health and environmental
challenges. EPA's research is typically crosscutting, multidisciplinary, and at the
cutting edge of environmental science; reflects the dynamic nature of science;
and brings scientific rigor to the characterization of uncertainty and risk.
Jim Gulliford
Assistant Administrator
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxic Substances
Ben Grumbles
Assistant Administrator
Office of Water
George Gray
Assistant Administrator
Office of Research and Development
-------
ics
OBJECTIVES
Objective 4.1: Chemic
and Pesticide Risks . .
Communities and ecosystems are extremely complex
systems of enormous variety. To protect and sustain
them, EPA is working to manage environmental risks—
from risks presented by the pesticides and chemicals on
which we depend, to threats to our
watersheds, to hazards posed by pol-
lutants entering our homes, schools,
workplaces, and neighborhoods. We
work to protect critical ecosystems,
such as wetlands and estuaries, and
collaborate with states and others on
"place-based" efforts to protect
resources such as the Great Lakes,
Chesapeake Bay, and Gulf of
Mexico. We direct our
risk-management efforts toward the
greatest threats in our communities
and the most sensitive populations,
including children, the elderly, Native
Americans, and residents of areas
that may be disproportionately
exposed to environmental hazards.
Our strategy for reducing risk calls first for
preventing pollution at its source. When programs to
prevent pollution are not viable, however, we strive to
minimize the waste generated, avoid harming habitat,
ensure that wastes are disposed of safely, and remediate
contamination that does occur.
Key to protecting the health of people, communities,
and ecosystems is identifying, assessing, and reducing the
risks presented by the thousands of chemicals on which
our society and economy have come to depend. We
ensure that chemicals and pesticides
entering the market meet health and
safety standards and register them for
use. And we continue to review chem-
icals already in
commerce to reduce potential risk.
Objective 42:
Communities
Objective 4.3: Restore
and Protect Critical
Ecosystems
Objective 4.4: Enhance
Science and Research .
Many of EPAs programs to
achieve and sustain healthy commu-
nities and ecosystems are designed to
bring tools, resources, and approaches
to bear at the local level. We build
community capacity by providing
information to understand risk and to
evaluate the effects of development on
health and the environment. We
encourage redevelopment by providing
funds to inventory, assess, and clean
up the hundreds of thousands of properties that lie aban-
doned or unused due to previous pollution. Ensuring that
homes have access to clean, safe drinking water and basic
sanitation is a high priority, and we are assisting
communities in addressing local pollution and infrastruc-
ture challenges. These local and regional initiatives often
rely on collaboration among federal, state, tribal, and
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
local government agencies; business and
industry; environmental groups; and other
stakeholders. Such successful partnerships
have been instrumental in soliciting commu-
nity involvement and promoting a sense of
environmental stewardship to sustain
environmental improvements.
EPAs programs for protecting
ecosystems encompass a wide range of
approaches that address specific at-risk
regional areas—"placed-based initiatives"—
and larger categories of threatened systems,
such as estuaries and wetlands. Pollution
generated locally, combined with pollutants
carried by rivers and streams or deposited
from the air, can accumulate in ecosystems
and degrade them over time. Large water
bodies, such as the Gulf of Mexico, Great
Lakes, and Chesapeake Bay, have been
exposed to substantial pollution over many
years, and coastal estuaries and wetlands are
also vulnerable. As the population in coastal
regions grows, the challenges to preserve and
protect these important ecosystems increase.
Working with our partners and stakeholders,
we have established special programs to
protect and restore these unique resources.
Collaborative efforts are also key to
enhancing and sustaining environmental
progress domestically and abroad. EPA
works with other U.S. government agencies
and cooperates with other nations and
international organ-
izations to identify,
develop, and imple-
ment policies for
addressing environ-
mental problems.
Through such
organizations as the
North American
Commission on
Environmental Cooperation, we implement
agreements to reduce transboundary pollu-
tion and protect the health of citizens on our
borders. We strive to leverage funding and
other resources to assist developing countries
in managing their natural resources and pro-
tecting their citizens' health. We work to
incorporate and support environmental pro-
tection provisions in all international trade
agreements negotiated by the United States.
Underpinning all of this work is sound
science. Sound science guides us in identify-
ing and addressing emerging issues and
advances our understanding of long-standing
human health and environmental challenges.
EPAs research is at the leading edge of
environmental science; it cuts across envi-
ronmental media and academic disciplines to
characterize potential risks and benefits.
EPA conducts "core research" that builds
scientific knowledge of human health and
ecology and informs decision making. To
further our ability to measure and describe
environmental conditions, EPA researchers
advance monitoring and assessment
programs and enable such reviews as EPAs
Report on the Environment.1 Our research
encourages stewardship and sustainable solu-
tions that can prevent pollution by building
environmental protection into national
economic and individual consumer decisions.
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Objective 4.1: Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide Risks
OBJECTIVE 4.1: CHEMICAL, ORGANISM, AND PESTICIDE RISKS
BY 2011, PREVENT AND REDUCE PESTICIDE AND INDUSTRIAL CHEMICAL RISKS
TO HUMANS, COMMUNITIES, AND ECOSYSTEMS.
Sub-objective 4.1.1: Reduce Chemical
Risks. By 2011, prevent and reduce
chemical risks to humans, communities,
and ecosystems.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, eliminate or effectively
manage risks associated with
100 percent of High Production
Volume (HPV) chemicals for which
unreasonable risks have been identi-
fied through EPA risk assessments.
(Baseline: EPA screening of data
obtained through the HPV Challenge
Program is commencing in 2006;
actions to obtain additional informa-
tion needed to assess risks will
commence subsequently as chemicals
are identified as priority concerns
through the screening process.)2
• Through 2011, ensure that new
chemicals introduced into commerce
do not pose unreasonable risks to
workers, consumers, or the environ-
ment. (The FY 2004 and FY 2005
baseline is 100 percent.)3
• By 2011, achieve a 26 percent
cumulative reduction of chronic
human health risk from environmen-
tal releases of industrial chemicals in
commerce since 2001. (Baseline:
Cumulative reduction reported from
2002-2003 is 6.6 percent.)4
• By 2010, eliminate childhood lead
poisoning as a public health concern
by reducing to 0 the number of cases
of children (aged 1-5 years) with
elevated blood lead levels
(>10ug/dl). (The 1999-2002 baseline
is 310,000 cases.)5
• By 2010, reduce to 28 percent
the percent difference in the
geometric mean blood lead level in
low-income children 1-5 years old as
compared to the geometric mean for
non-low-income children 1-5 years
old. (The 1991-1994 baseline is
37 percent.)6
• By 2011, through work with interna-
tional partners, eliminate the use of
lead in gasoline in the remaining
35 countries that still use lead as an
additive, affecting more than
700 million people. (Baseline: As of
January 2006, 35 countries had not
phased lead out of gasoline.)7
• By 2011, through work with interna-
tional partners, more than 3 billion
people will have access to low-sulfur
fuel in 10 countries, including China,
India, Mexico and Brazil. (Baseline:
As of January 2006, none of the
developing countries had access to
low-sulfur fuel.)8
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
Sub-objective 4.1.2: Reduce Chemical
Risks at Facilities and in Communities. By
2011, protect human health, communities,
and the environment from chemical releases
through facility risk-reduction efforts and
building community preparedness and
response capabilities.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, continue to maintain the
Risk Management Plan (RMP)
prevention program and further
reduce by 5 percent the number
of accidents at RMP facilities.
(The baseline is an annual average
of 340 accidents, based on
RMP program data through 2003.)
• By 2011, reduce by 5 percent the
consequences of accidents at RMP
facilities, as measured by injuries,
fatalities, and property damage.
(The baseline is an annual average
of 358 injuries, 13 fatalities, and
$143.5 million in property damage
at RMP facilities from 1995-2003.)
• By 2011, vulnerability zones
surrounding RMP facilities will be
reduced by 5 percent from the
2004 baseline, which will result in
the reduction of risk for more than
4 million people in the community.
(The 2004 baseline is 1,086,428 mi2
of cumulative area of RMP facility
vulnerability zones.)9
• By 2011, improve by 10 percent from
the 2007 baseline the capabilities of
Local Emergency Planning
Committees (LEPCs) to prevent,
prepare for, and respond to chemical
emergencies (as measured by a survey
of those LEPCs), thereby reducing
the risk to communities from the
potentially devastating effects of
chemical accidents.
Sub-objective 4.1.3: Protect Human Health
from Pesticide Risk. Through 2011, protect
human health by implementing our statutes
and taking regulatory actions to ensure
pesticides continue to be safe and available
when used in accordance with the label.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, reduce the concentration of
pesticides detected in the general
population by 50 percent. (Baselines
are determined from 1999-2002
Centers for Disease Control-National
Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey [NHANES] data.)10
• Through 2011, protect those occupa-
tionally exposed to pesticides by
improving upon or maintaining a
rate of 3.5 incidents per 100,000
potential risk events. (Baseline:
There were 1,385 occupational
pesticide incidents in 2003 out of
39,850,000 potential pesticide risk
events/year.)11
• By 2011, improve the health of those
who work in or around pesticides by
reaching a 50 percent targeted reduc-
tion in moderate to severe incidents
for 6 acutely toxic agricultural pesti-
cides with the highest incident rates:
chlorpyrifos, diazinon, malathion,
pyrethrins, 2,4-dichlorophenoxy
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Objective 4.1: Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide Risks
acetic acid (2,4-D), and carbofuran.
(Baselines will be determined from
the Poison Control Center (PCC)
Toxics Exposure Surveillance System
(TESS) database for 1999-2003.)12
By 2011, annually continue to avoid
$900M in termite structural damage
by ensuring that safe and effective
pesticides are registered/re-registered
and available for termite treatment.15
Sub-objective 4.1.4: Protect the
Environment from Pesticide Risk. Through
2011, protect the environment by imple-
menting our statutes and taking regulatory
actions to ensure pesticides continue to be
safe and available when used in accordance
with the label.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, reduce the percentage of
urban watersheds that exceed the
National Pesticide Program aquatic
life benchmarks for three key
pesticides of concern (diazinon,
chlorpyrifos, and malathion). (The
1992-2001 baselines as a percentage
of urban watersheds sampled that
exceeded benchmarks are: diazinon,
40 percent; chlorpyrifos, 37 percent;
and malathion, 30 percent.)13
• By 2011, reduce the percentage of
agricultural watersheds that exceed
EPA aquatic life benchmarks for two
key pesticides (azinphos-methyl and
chlorpyrifos). (Based on 1992-2001
data, 18 percent of agricultural
watersheds sampled exceeded
benchmarks for azinphos-methyl
and chlorpyrifos.)
Sub-objective 4.1.5: Realize the Value from
Pesticide Availability. Through 2011, ensure
the public health and socio-economic benefits
of pesticide availability and use are achieved.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, annually continue to avoid
$1.5 billion in crop loss by ensuring
that safe and effective pesticides are
available to address emergency pest
infestations.14
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR REDUCING
RISKS FROM CHEMICALS AND PESTICIDES
EPA works with other federal agencies,
states, tribes, industry, environmental groups,
international entities, and other stakeholders
to reduce the risks that chemicals and pesti-
cides can present to people, communities, and
ecosystems. Our strategies for protecting pub-
lic health and the environment rely heavily
on these partnerships and on voluntary efforts
by manufacturers, consumers, and the public.
REDUCING RISKS
FROM CHEMICALS
EPA uses a
two-pronged strate-
gy to prevent and
reduce risks posed
by chemicals and
microorganisms:
prevent chemicals
and organisms that
pose unreasonable
risks from entering
U.S. commerce, and
screen chemicals
already in commerce
for potential risk.
The 1977 Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) requires that EPA review all new
industrial chemicals and organisms before
they can be produced or imported and that
we be notified of significant new uses for
certain chemicals that we have already
reviewed.16 We will continue to screen, assess,
and reduce risks posed by the 66,600 chemi-
cals that were in use before TSCA was
enacted. Thousands of these chemicals are
still used today, and nearly 3,000 of them
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
are HPV chemicals, produced or imported
into the United States in quantities exceed-
ing 1 million pounds per year. Under the
HPV Challenge Program,17 approximately
400 companies and 100 consortia have
voluntarily provided critical hazard screening
data on almost 1,400 HPV chemicals, and we
will continue to make this information
available to the public.18 We will continue to
participate in the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD)
Screening Information Data Set program,19
the international equivalent of our domestic
HPV Challenge Program.
Under our New
Chemicals Program,
we will continue to
review pre-manufac-
ture notices to assess
1,300-1,500 new
chemicals or organ-
isms each year.
Using advanced
screening tools, we
can estimate the
potential health and
environmental haz-
ards of chemicals
released to the envi-
ronment.20 We will
also use these tools
to encourage devel-
opment of safer or
"greener" new chem-
icals. Under our
Sustainable Futures
initiative, we pro-
vide chemical manufacturers with the same
screening tools we use to evaluate potential
health risks and environmental impact.21 As
more companies voluntarily pre-screen their
products, we expect to see fewer problematic
new chemicals, leading to measurable effi-
ciencies in our review efforts. We will
continue to submit our screening tools and
models for rigorous peer review, and we will
update and expand them accordingly.
ADDRESSING LEAD AND
OTHER HIGH-RISK CHEMICALS
EPA targets risk-reduction efforts at
specific chemicals and environmental justice
concerns. For example, as a result of federal
efforts since the 1990s, children's blood lead
levels in the United States have declined
dramatically, and we expect to eliminate
childhood lead poisoning as a public health
concern by 2010. Toward that goal, we are
developing a program to address lead hazards
created by renovation, repair, and painting.
We are also working to eliminate the disparity
in blood lead levels
between low-income
and other popula-
tions and to address
other environmental
justice concerns.
We will exercise
continued vigilance
to ensure that no
resurgence in child-
hood lead poisoning
occurs.
Internationally,
we will reduce chil-
dren's exposure to
lead through the
global Partnership
for Clean Fuels and
Vehicles, which is
working to eliminate
lead from gasoline,
reduce sulfur in
fuels, and introduce cleaner vehicle tech-
nologies. Reducing sulfur in fuel will decrease
vehicle emissions of particulate matter,
addressing a growing public health concern
in many countries, particularly in the devel-
oping world.
EPA is also evaluating emerging chemical
concerns and taking action to manage risks.
Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), a persistent
chemical causing systemic and developmental
toxicity in animal studies, has been found in
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Objective 4.1: Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide Risks
human blood and has a half-life in humans
measured in years.22 We will work with the
8 major U.S. operations that generate or use
PFOA to reduce their facility emissions and
the levels of PFOA, PFOA precursors, and
related chemicals in their products by
95 percent no later than 2010 and to
eliminate them by 2015.
Mercury is a potent neurotoxin that places
adults, children, and developing fetuses at risk
for a variety of health problems, including
developmental delays. The United States has
been a catalyst for increasing international
collaboration, building other countries'
capacities, and promoting data-sharing to
characterize and reduce mercury use and
releases around the world. We will participate
in demonstration, training, public awareness,
and information-sharing programs to achieve
measurable reductions in the commercial and
manufactured products, coal combustion,
artisanal and small-scale gold mining, and
chlor-alkali sectors, which together account
for up to 80 percent of global anthropogenic
mercury emissions.
We will continue our multimedia efforts
to prevent new persistent, bioaccumulative,
toxic (PBT) chemicals from entering com-
merce and to reduce the risks associated with
PBTs already in use, including mercury and
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). We will
ensure that PCB waste is stored and disposed
safely, and we will advise the regulated com-
munity on remediating PCB contamination,
handling PCB disposal applications promptly,
and overseeing PCB-permitted storage and
disposal facilities.
Tribal environmental and health issues
will continue to be a priority for our chemi-
cal program. We will use risk assessment
methods that take into account the different
risk profiles of some tribal lifestyles, and
we will provide information and tools to help
prevent adverse effects on these sensitive
populations. EPA will also implement
lead, asbestos, and PCB programs in tribal
communities.
REDUCING RISKS
FROM ACCIDENTAL
CHEMICAL RELEASES
EPA is working to
identify, better under-
stand, and prevent
potential risks from
accidental chemical
releases. Under our
Risk Management
Plan (RMP) Program,23
we have audited
approximately 1,800
RMP facilities and processed more than
12,000 RMPs since 2003. We will
continue to analyze data collected under the
RMP and Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know24 programs to
identify the types and locations of facilities
with the greatest potential for chemical acci-
dents and releases and to identify susceptible
and sensitive populations that may be at
higher risk. We will use this information to
develop voluntary initiatives for high-risk
facilities and geographic areas.
In the event that a chemical emergency
does occur, protecting federal, state, and
local first responders and on-site personnel
is critical. EPA provides emergency personnel
with information they need to take necessary
precautions and treat individuals who
may be on the scene. We are collaborating
with other federal, private, and academic
organizations to more quickly develop
Acute Exposure Guideline Levels, which
emergency responders use in planning and
mitigation efforts.25
REDUCING PESTICIDE RISKS TO HEALTH
EPA's Pesticide Program screens new
pesticides before they reach the market and
ensures that pesticides already in commerce
are safe.26 Under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA),
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
L
(FFDCA), and the Food Quality Protection
Act (FQPA) of 1996 that amended FIFRA
and FFDCA, EPA is responsible for licensing
and re-licensing pesticides to protect
consumers, pesticide users, workers who may
be exposed to pesticides, children, and other
sensitive populations. To make regulatory
decisions and establish
tolerances or maximum
allowable pesticide
residues on food and
feed, we must balance
the risks and benefits of
using the pesticide, con-
sider cumulative and
aggregate risks, and
ensure extra protection
for children.
Our Pesticide
Registration Program
will continue to screen
pesticide products before
they enter the market.27 We will review pes-
ticide data and implement use restrictions
and instructions needed to ensure that pesti-
cides used according to label directions will
not result in unreasonable risk. During our
pre-market review, we will consider human
health and environmental concerns as well as
the pesticide's potential benefits. Under our
Reregistration Program, we will continue to
review existing registrations to ensure they
meet current scientific standards and address
concerns identified after the original registra-
tion.28 In addition, we will meet a provision
under FQPA (related to the FIFRA require-
ment for reregistration) for Registration
Review, a periodic review of existing pesti-
cide registrations to ensure that they meet
the most current standards.
EPA began promoting reduced-risk pesti-
cides in 1995 by giving registration priority to
pesticides that will have low impact on human
health; low toxicity to non-target birds, fish,
and plants; low potential for contaminating
ground water; lower use rates; and low pest
resistance potential and that will comport with
Integrated Pest Management approaches.29
Several countries and international organiza-
tions have instituted programs to facilitate
registering reduced risk pesticides. We will con-
tinue to work with the international scientific
community and OECD member countries to
register 12 new reduced-risk pesticides and to
establish related tolerances (maximum residue
limits). Through these efforts, we can help to
reduce risks to Americans from foods imported
from other countries.
An important part of our Pesticide
Program is the work done in the field to
ensure that the decisions made during our
licensing and re-licensing processes are
implemented in pesticide use. An estimated
1.8 million agricultural workers could be
exposed to pesticides, and millions of individ-
uals use pesticides in occupations such as
lawn care, healthcare, food preparation, and
landscape maintenance.30 Each year, the risk
assessments that we conduct yield extensive
risk-management requirements for hundreds
of pesticides and uses. Working closely with
states, tribes, and other federal agencies, our
field programs address worker safety, provide
certification and training on using more
hazardous pesticides, protect endangered
species, and encourage environmental
stewardship. For example, through our
Pesticide Environmental Stewardship
Program, we form partnerships with pesticide
users and work with them on pollution pre-
vention strategies and Integrated Pest
Management techniques that can reduce
their use of pesticides and lower risks. We
will continue to reduce the number and
severity of pesticide exposure incidents by
promulgating regulations under the Worker
Protection Standard, training and certifying
pesticide applicators, assessing and managing
risks, and developing effective communica-
tion and outreach programs. Working with
our state, tribal, and other regulatory
partners, we will acquire information on local
pesticide use patterns, geological conditions,
location of endangered species, and tribal
cultural practices that will help us assess risks
and make practical, effective decisions.
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Objective 4.1: Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide Risks
REDUCING PESTICIDE RISKS TO
ECOSYSTEMS
Along with assessing the risks that pesti-
cides pose to human health, EPA conducts
ecological risk assessments to determine
potential effects on plants, animals, and
ecosystems. We work to protect ecosystems,
particularly the plants and animals that are
not targets of the pesticide, and we have
additional responsibilities under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA).31 Under
FIFRA, we must determine that a pesticide is
not likely to harm the environment, and we
may impose risk mitigation measures such as
restricting uses, denying uses, or requiring
monitoring of environmental conditions,
such as effects on water sources.32
Reduced concentrations of pesticides in
water sources indicate the efficacy of EPA's
risk assessment, management, mitigation, and
communication activities. Using sampling
data collected under the U.S. Geological
Survey's (USGS) National Water Quality
Assessment program, we will monitor the
impact of our regulatory decisions for four
pesticides of concern—diazinon, chlorpyrifos,
malathion, and azinphos-methyl—and
consider whether any additional action is
necessary.33 We will work with USGS to
develop sampling plans and refine goals, and
we will ask USGS to add additional insecti-
cides to sampling protocols and establish
baselines for newer products that are
replacing organophosphates, such as
synthetic pyrethroids.
Under ESA, we must ensure that pesti-
cide regulatory decisions will not adversely
modify critical habitat or jeopardize listed
species.34 Given approximately 600 active
ingredients in more than 19,000 products—
many of which have multiple uses—and
approximately 1,200 listed species with
diverse habits and habitat requirements, this
presents a great challenge. We are working
with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service
and National Marine Fisheries Service to
Pesticides With Concentrations
GreaterThan an Aquatic-Life Benchmark,
Agricultural Streams
Insecticides
Organochlorine Insecticides
Herbicides
Percentage of Stream Sites Exceeding
One or More Benchmarks
Pesticides With Concentrations
GreaterThan an Aquatic-Life Benchmark,
Urban Streams
Insecticides
Organochlorine Insecticides
Herbicides
Percentage of Stream Sites Exceeding
One or More Benchmarks
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
establish an efficient process for carrying out
our ESA obligations. Together, we are devel-
oping "counterpart regulations" that provide
EPA authority to make certain determina-
tions without further consultation. We will
make assessing risks to endangered species a
priority and consider endangered species rou-
tinely in EPA reviews.35
REALIZING THE VALUE
OF PESTICIDE AVAILABILITY
To protect public health and the envi-
ronment from risks posed by pesticides and to
promote safer means of pest control, EPA
registers pesticides under the authority of
Section 3 of FIFRA. FIFRA requires us to
determine that the pesticide will not present
an unreasonable adverse effect, that is, "any
unreasonable risk to man or the environ-
ment, taking into account the economic,
social, and environmental costs and benefits
of the use of any pesticide." EPA's registration
programs under FIFRA thus ensure that the
nation has access to effective pesticides that
eliminate or limit losses and are protective of
human health and the environment.
For example, an estimated $900 million in
termite damage is avoided each year through
the availability of effective termiticides.
While some effective termiticides have been
removed from the market due to safety
concerns, EPA continues to work with
industry to register safe alternatives that
meet or exceed all current safety standards
and offer a high level of protection.
In the event of an emergency, FIFRA
Section 18 also provides EPA the authority
to temporarily exempt certain pesticide uses
from registration requirements. We must
ensure that, under the very limiting provi-
sions of the exemption, such emergency uses
will not present an unreasonable risk to the
environment. EPA's timely review of emer-
gency exemptions has avoided an estimated
$1.5 billion in crop losses per year.
Exemptions may be granted for one-time
events or to respond to emergency situations
resulting from new pests on crops when
exemptions are necessary while progress is
made towards full registration. In such cases,
EPA's goal is to complete the more detailed
and comprehensive unreasonable risk
review conducted for pesticide registration
within 3 years.
ENDOCRINE DISRUPTORS
EPA needs valid tests to assess new
chemicals' and pesticides' potential for
endocrine disruption. The Endocrine
Disrupter Screening Program will work to
validate the screens and tests needed before
large-scale reviews can take place. We will
continue to obtain technical advice on the
validation of tests from external experts.
EPA is also working to minimize the use of
animals for these tests.
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Objective 4.2: Communities
OBJECTIVE 4.2: COMMUNITIES
SUSTAIN, CLEAN UP, AND RESTORE COMMUNITIES AND THE ECOLOGICAL
SYSTEMS THAT SUPPORT THEM.
Sub-objective 4.2.1: Sustain Community
Health. By 2011, reduce the air, water, and
land impacts of new growth and development
through use of smart growth strategies in
30 communities that will achieve significant
measurable environmental and/or public
health improvements. (Baselines for criteria
air pollutants, land consumption, and storm
water run-off prior to EPA assistance will be
established for each community.)36
Sub-objective 4.2.2: Restore Community
Health Through Collaborative Problem-
Solving. By 2011, 30 communities with
potential environmental justice concerns will
achieve significant measurable environmental
or public health improvement through
collaborative problem-solving strategies.
(Baseline: In 2006, 20 communities with
potential environmental justice concerns
are in the process of using collaborative
problem-solving strategies in efforts to
achieve environmental or public health
improvement. Community-specific
baselines will be developed by 2008 for
assessing improvement.)37
Sub-objective 4.2.3: Assess and Clean Up
Brownfields. Working with state, tribal, and
local partners, promote the assessment,
cleanup, and sustainable reuse of brownfields
properties.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, conduct environmental
assessments at 13,900 (cumulative)
properties. (Baseline: As of the
end of FY 2005, EPA assessed
7,900 properties.)
• By 2011, make an additional 1,125
acres of brownfields ready for reuse
from the 2006 baseline. (The 2006
baseline will be available in 2007.
See "Performance Measurement"
section below.)
• By 2011, leverage $12.9 billion
(cumulative) in assessment, cleanup,
and redevelopment funding at
brownfields properties. (FY 2005
baseline is $7.5B.)38
Sub-objective 4.2.4: Sustain and Restore
the U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental
Health. By 2012, sustain and restore the envi-
ronmental health along the U.S.-Mexico
border through implementation of the
"Border 2012" plan.
Strategic Targets
• By 2012, achieve a majority of
currently exceeded water quality
standards in impaired transboundary
segments of U.S. surface waters.
(2002 baseline: 17 currently exceeded
water quality standards were identi-
fied for 10 transboundary segments
of U.S. surface waters.)
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
• By 2012, provide safe drinking water
to 25 percent of homes in the
U.S.-Mexico border area that lacked
access to safe drinking water in 2003.
(2003 baseline: 98,515 homes lacked
access to safe drinking water.)39
• By 2012, provide adequate waste-
water sanitation to 25 percent of
homes in the U.S.-Mexico border
area that lacked access to wastewater
sanitation in 2003. (2003 baseline:
690,723 homes lacked access to
wastewater sanitation.)40
• By 2012, cleanup five waste sites
(two abandoned waste tire sites
and three abandoned hazardous
waste sites) in the U.S.-Mexico
border region.
Sub-objective 4.2.5: Sustain and Restore
Pacific Island Territories. By 2011, sustain
and restore the environmental health of the
U.S. Pacific Island Territories of American
Samoa, Guam, and the Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, 95 percent of the population
in each of the U.S. Pacific Island
Territories served by community
drinking water systems will receive
drinking water that meets all applica-
ble health-based drinking water
standards throughout the year. (2005
baseline: 95 percent of the population
in American Samoa, 10 percent in
the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, and 80 percent of
Guam served by community water
systems received drinking water that
meets all applicable health-based
drinking water standards throughout
the year.)
• By 2011, the sewage treatment plants
in the U.S. Pacific Island Territories
will comply 90 percent of the time
with permit limits for biochemical
oxygen demand (BOD) and total
suspended solids (TSS). (2005 base-
line: The sewage treatment plants in
the Pacific Island Territories
complied 59 percent of the time with
the BOD and TSS permit limits.)
• By 2011, beaches in each of the
U.S. Pacific Island Territories moni-
tored under the Beach Safety
Program will be open and safe for
swimming 96 percent of days of the
beach season. (2005 baseline:
Beaches were open and safe
64 percent of the 3 65-day beach
season in American Samoa,
97 percent in the Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands, and
76 percent in Guam.)
Sub-objective 4.2.6: Reduce Persistent
Organic Pollutant Exposure. By 2011,
reduce the mean maternal serum blood levels
of persistent organic pollutant (POP)
contaminants in indigenous populations in
the Arctic.41
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, reduce mean maternal
blood levels of polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) (measured as
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Objective 4.2: Communities
Aroclor 1260) in indigenous popula-
tions in the Arctic to 5.6 ug/1.
(The 2006 calculated baseline mean
maternal serum level for PCBs
was 6.3 ug/1.)
By 2011, reduce mean maternal
blood levels of chlordane (measured
as the metabolites oxychlordane and
trans-nonachlor) in indigenous
populations in the Arctic to 1.1 ug/1.
(The 2006 calculated baseline mean
maternal serum level for total
chlordane was 1.3 ug/1.)
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
SUSTAINING AND RESTORING
COMMUNITIES
EPA is committed to sustaining and
restoring the health of our communities and
the ecological systems that support them.
We are working to build capabilities in
communities across the United States to
ensure clean and safe water for drinking,
swimming, and fishing; healthy air; and safe
management of waste and waste by-products.
Our work with communities will also include
efforts to address environmental justice and
tribal issues and to advance environmental
stewardship and sustainable practices.
Achieving these goals will require cross-
media coordination and innovative
strategies, tailored by community stakehold-
ers. As we expand our knowledge of
environmental conditions, stressors, and solu-
tions, we expect community-based strategies
for environmental protection to become even
more effective.
EPA's strategy for community-based
protection of local natural resources is based
on four components:
• Inform local decision making. We will
continue to improve information
exchange and access to environmen-
tal information.
Build local capacity. We will develop
and deliver tools to help local
agencies and community groups use
environmental assessment and plan-
ning data, work collaboratively and
cooperatively with a range of stake-
holders, and participate more fully in
environmental decision making.
Provide technical and financial assis-
tance directly to communities. We will
help neighborhood groups adopt com-
prehensive, integrated approaches to
environmental problems. For exam-
ple, our Community Action for a
Renewed Environment (CARE)
Program provides competitive grants
to help communities create collabo-
rative partnerships to reduce releases
and minimize exposure to toxins.42
Through programs like CARE, we
expect that by 2011 more than 100
community partnerships will be
involving the public in addressing
disproportionate environmental risks.
Through international free trade
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
agreements, our community assis-
tance efforts will extend to some of
our international trading partners,
promoting ecologically compatible
development abroad.
• Ensure that national policies and
programs support, rather than hinder,
comprehensive, integrated management
of local resources. We will review new
policies and regulations to ensure
that federal programs are compatible
with local efforts and promote overall
environmental improvement. We
will continue collaborating with
other federal agencies to remove
barriers and create incentives for
smart growth and integrated environ-
mental management.
RESTORING HEALTHY COMMUNITIES:
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
EPA remains committed to environmen-
tal justice for all people, regardless of race,
color, national origin, or income, in accor-
dance with Executive Order 12898, "Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations."43 Recognizing that minority
and/or low-income communities may be
disproportionately exposed to environmental
hazards and risks, we will work to protect
these and other affected communities.
Environmental justice means not only pro-
tecting human health and the environment
for everyone, but also ensuring that all people
are treated fairly and are given opportunities
to participate meaningfully in developing,
implementing, and enforcing environmental
laws, regulations, and policies.
EPA is establishing measurable environ-
mental justice commitments for eight
national priorities: reducing asthma attacks,
reducing exposure to air toxics, increasing
compliance with regulations, reducing
incidence of elevated blood lead levels,
ensuring that fish and shellfish are safe
to eat, ensuring that water is safe to drink,
revitalizing brownfields and contaminated
sites, and using collaborative problem-solving
to address environmental and public health
concerns. We will promote environmental
justice in all aspects of our work by training
staff; providing guidance, online tools, and
other resources; sharing information about
successful strategies; and enhancing staff
skills in working with community-based
organizations. We will continue to use
dispute resolution, facilitation, listening
sessions, and other consensus-building
techniques and to convene stakeholders
to address environmental and public
health issues.
ASSESSING AND CLEANING UP
BROWNFIELDS
Brownfields are real properties where
expansion, redevelopment, or reuse may be
complicated by the presence or potential
presence of hazardous substances, pollutants,
or contaminants. Assessing brownfields can
help communities understand the risks these
properties pose and provides the information
needed to undertake cleanup and reuse.
Cleaning up and reinvesting in these properties
may increase local tax bases, facilitate job
growth, utilize existing infrastructure, take
development pressures off undeveloped land,
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Objective 4.2: Communities
and improve and protect the environment.
EPA will continue to award competitive
grants to assess and clean up brownfields and
to provide job training opportunities within
affected communities.
Awards are based on a number of factors
including how well the project reduces threats
to human health and the environment, and
creates and/or preserves greenspace. In addi-
tion, the Brownfields Revitalization Act
requires us to consider "the extent to which
the grant would address or facilitate the iden-
tification and reduction of threats to the
health or welfare of minority or low-income
communities, or other sensitive populations,"
underlining our commitment to environmen-
tal justice.44 Our Brownfields Program is also
developing a methodology to assess the rela-
tionship between EPA-funded brownfields
projects and the sensitive, socio-economically
disadvantaged communities that they serve.
EPA will use this methodology to improve
how the Brownfields Program incorporates
environmental justice concerns into
its operations.
We will continue to provide funds to
state and tribal governments to establish and
enhance response programs that oversee the
majority of brownfields assessments and
cleanups. These programs provide technical
oversight and assist property owners; create
inventories of brownfields sites; and develop
policies, regulations, and ordinances. Funding
can also be used to conduct assessment and
cleanup activities at brownfields properties.
EPA funding is often critical for operating
these response programs, particularly for
tribal governments.
We will also continue to provide outreach
and technical assistance to communities con-
fronting brownfields and perform targeted
assessments at sites where stakeholders are
seeking federal assistance to identify the
extent of contamination. Through the
Brownfields and Land Revitalization
Technology Support Center,45 we will help
streamline site investigations and cleanup
processes, identify technology options, evalu-
ate contractor capabilities and
recommendations, and explain complex tech-
nologies to communities. Technical tools such
as Triad46 and SMARTe47 can aid communi-
ties' brownfields efforts. EPA will continue to
sponsor brownfields workshops and educa-
tional events that provide forums for sharing
ideas, lessons learned, and best practices.
REDUCING TRANSBOUNDARY THREATS
ALONG THE U.S.-MEXico BORDER
The U.S.-Mexico Border 2012 Program, a
joint effort between the governments of
the United States and Mexico, works with the
10 border states and border communities to
reduce transboundary threats to improve the
region's environmental and ecosystem health.48
As part of our continuing commitment to
environmental justice, EPA is working with
some disadvantaged border communities to
improve water quality in both the United
States and Mexico. For decades, raw sewage
posed a significant public health and
environmental threat to U.S. and Mexican
communities. Inadequate water and sewage
treatment cause border residents to suffer dis-
proportionately from hepatitis A and other
waterborne diseases. EPA assists communities
in the U.S.-Mexico border region to increase
the number of homes with access to safe
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
drinking water and basic sanitation. As this
infrastructure comes on line, discharges of
raw sewage will be reduced and surface water
quality will improve.
Restoration of sur-
face water quality on
10 impaired trans-
boundary waters is
an EPA priority.
EPA also will
address health and
environmental risks
presented by aban-
doned tires and
hazardous waste.
Piles of waste tires
breed mosquitoes and other disease-carrying
organisms, and they are prone to fires that
are difficult to extinguish. Contaminated
hazardous waste sites pose acute and long-
term risks from metal poisoning. We will
address key sites on the border, laying the
foundation for future remediation efforts.
To learn more, go to: www.epa.gov/
owm/mab/mexican.
RESTORING ISLAND COMMUNITIES
The U.S. Pacific Island Territories of
American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands, and Guam face
severe environmental problems. Poor waste-
water conveyance and treatment systems that
contaminate drinking water wells and surface
waters pose an immediate danger to residents.
Island beaches, with important recreational,
economic, and cultural significance, are pol-
luted and frequently placed under advisories.
EPA is targeting infrastructure and non-
point source grants toward the most serious
deficiencies. We are providing technical
assistance to improve island utilities' capacity
for protecting public health and the
environment. With island and federal
partners, we will continue to develop
a Territories Bond Bank that will provide
access to more affordable financing, greatly
enhancing the islands' ability to fund critical
capital improvement projects.
PROTECTING
ARCTIC
INDIGENOUS
COMMUNITIES
POPs transported
in the atmosphere
and deposited across
borders pose a contin-
uing threat to human
health and the
ecosystems in North
America, especially the Arctic. Traditional
foods expose indigenous Arctic populations,
including those in Alaska, to higher levels of
POPs than other populations. Addressing
international sources can reduce POP levels
in the Arctic, and the United States is a
strong supporter of the Stockholm
Convention on Persistent Organic
Pollutants, a global treaty to reduce POPs
which EPA helps to implement.49
The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment
Program, which documents indigenous
populations' exposure to toxics in remote
areas, indicates that Russia and China are
among the largest sources of POPs and other
pollutants in the Arctic.50 We will work with
Russia and other Arctic Council members to
reduce these pollutants and to collect, safely
store, and dispose of stockpiles of obsolete
pesticides. Based on EPA-led Arctic Council
projects, we estimate that about 24,000 met-
ric tons of POP pesticides will be removed
from unsafe storage and destroyed by 2008,51
and about 12,000 metric tons of PCB oil will
be destroyed by 2009.52 We will continue
working to raise awareness about POPs, build
capacity to prevent pollution, and share tech-
nologies to protect indigenous Arctic
communities.
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Objective 4.3: Restore and Protect Critical Ecosystems
OBJECTIVE 4.3: RESTORE AND PROTECT CRITICAL
ECOSYSTEMS
PROTECT, SUSTAIN, AND RESTORE THE HEALTH OF CRITICAL NATURAL
HABITATS AND ECOSYSTEMS.
Sub-objective 4.3.1: Increase Wetlands.
By 2011, working with partners, achieve a
net increase in wetlands acres with additional
focus on assessment of wetland condition.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, working with partners,
achieve a net increase of 100,000
acres of wetlands per year with
additional focus on biological and
functional measures and assessment
of wetland condition. (2004 baseline:
32,000 acres annual net wetland
gain.)53
• By 2011, in partnership with the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
states, and tribes, achieve "no net
loss" of wetlands each year under the
Clean Water Act Section 404
regulatory program, beginning in
2007. (Baseline: New baseline to
be determined in 2008.)
Sub-objective 4.3.2: Facilitate the
Ecosystem-Scale Restoration of Estuaries of
National Significance. By 2011, working
with partners, protect or restore an additional
(i.e., measuring from 2007 forward) 250,000
acres of habitat within the study areas for the
28 estuaries that are part of the National
Estuary Program. (2005 baseline:
449,242 acres of habitat protected or
restored, cumulative from 2002.)
Sub-objective 4.3.3: Improve the Health of
the Great Lakes. By 2011, prevent water
pollution and protect aquatic systems so that
the overall ecosystem health of the Great
Lakes is at least 23 points on a 40-point
CRITICAL ECOSYSTEMS
Ecosyster
(oreat Lakes
Chesapeake Bay
Gulf of Mexico
Long Island
Columbia Rive
Basin
scale. (2005 baseline: Great Lakes rating of
21.5 on the 40-point scale where the rating
uses selected Great Lakes State of the Lakes
Ecosystem indicators based on a 1 to 5 rating
system for each indicator, where 1 is poor
and 5 is good.)54
Strategic Targets:
• Through 2011, maintain or improve
an average annual 5 percent decline
for the long-term trend in average
concentrations of PCBs in whole
lake trout and walleye samples.
(1990 baseline: Concentration levels
at stations in Lakes Superior
[0.45 ppm], Michigan [2.72 ppm],
Huron [1.5 ppm], Erie [1.35 ppm] and
Ontario [2.18 ppm].)55
• Through 2011, maintain or improve
an average 7 percent annual decline
for the long-term trend in average
concentrations of toxic chemicals
(PCBs) in the air in the Great Lakes
Basin. (1992 baseline: Concentration
levels for U.S. stations: Lake Superior
[100 pg/m3], Lake Michigan [289
pg/m3], and Lake Erie [431 pg/m3].)56
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
• By 2010, restore and delist a cumula-
tive total of at least 8 Areas of
Concern within the Great Lakes
Basin (2005 baseline: 0 Areas of
Concern de-listed as of 2005 of the
31 total Areas of Concern.)57
• By 2011, remediate a cumulative
total of 7 million yards3 of contami-
nated sediment in the Great Lakes.
(2005 baseline: Of the 75 million
yards estimated to need remediation,
3.7 million yards3 of contaminated
sediments from the Great Lakes
have been remediated from 1997
through 2004. )58
Sub-objective 4.3.4: Improve the Health of
the Chesapeake Bay Ecosystem. By 2011,
prevent water pollution and protect aquatic
systems so that the overall aquatic system
health of the Chesapeake Bay is improved.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, achieve 45 percent
(83,250 acres) of the 185,000 acres of
submerged aquatic vegetation
necessary to achieve Chesapeake Bay
water quality standards. (2005 base-
line: 39 percent [72,935 acres] of
submerged aquatic vegetation
.1 8-
£ Q
necessary to achieve Chesapeake Bay
water quality standards.)59
• By 2011, achieve 40 percent
(29.92 km3) of the long-term restora-
tion goal of 100 percent attainment
of the dissolved oxygen water quality
standards in all tidal waters of the
Bay. (2005 baseline: 34 percent
[25.40 km3] of dissolved oxygen
goal achieved.)60
• By 2011, achieve 59 percent
(95.88 million pounds) of the imple-
mentation goal for nitrogen
reduction practices necessary to
achieve Chesapeake Bay water quality
standards, expressed as nitrogen
reduction in relation to achieving a
162.5 million pound reduction from
1985 levels (based on long-term
average hydrology simulations).
(2005 baseline: 41 percent nitrogen
goal achieved.)61
• By 2011, achieve 74 percent (10.63
million pounds) of the implementa-
tion goal for phosphorus reduction
practices necessary to achieve
Chesapeake Bay water quality
standards, expressed as phosphorus
reduction in relation to achieving a
14.36 million pound reduction from
1985 levels (based on long-term
average hydrology simulations).
(2005 baseline: 58 percent of
phosphorus goal achieved.)62
• By 2011, achieve 74 percent (1.25
million tons) of the implementation
goal for sediment reduction practices
necessary to achieve Chesapeake Bay
water quality standards, expressed as
sediment reduction in relation to
achieving a 1.69 million ton
reduction from 1985 levels (based on
long-term average hydrology simula-
tions). (2005 baseline: 54 percent of
sediment goal achieved.)63
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Objective 4.3: Restore and Protect Critical Ecosystems
Sub-objective 4.3.5: Improve the Health of
the Gulf of Mexico. By 2011, the overall
health of coastal waters of the Gulf of
Mexico will be improved from 2.4 to 2.6 on
the "good/fair/poor" scale of the National
Coastal Condition Report. (2004 baseline:
Gulf Coast rating of fair, or 2.4, is based on a
scale where 1 is poor and 5 is good.)
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, restore water and habitat
quality to meet water quality
standards in 162 impaired segments
(cumulative) in 13 priority coastal
areas (2002 baseline: 812 impaired
segments identified in Section
303(d) listings.)64
• By 2011, restore, enhance, or protect
a cumulative 20,000 acres of impor-
tant coastal and marine habitats.
(2005 baseline: 16,000 acres restored,
enhanced, or protected; Gulf of
Mexico coastal wetland habitats
include 3,769,370 acres.)65
• By 2015, reduce releases of nutrients
throughout the Mississippi River
Basin to reduce the size of the
hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico
to less than 5,000 km2, as measured
by the 5-year running average of
the size of the zone. (Baseline:
2002-2006 running average
size = 14,944 km2.)66
Sub-objective 4.3.6: Restore and Protect
Long Island Sound. By 2011, prevent water
pollution, improve water quality, protect
aquatic systems, and restore the habitat of
Long Island Sound by working through the
Long Island Sound Management Study
Conference partnership.
Strategic Targets
• By 2014, reduce point source nitro-
gen discharges to Long Island Sound
by 58.5 percent as measured by the
Long Island Sound Nitrogen Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL).
(TMDL 2000 baseline: 213,151
Ibs/day; 2014 goal: 85,238 Ibs/day.)67
• By 2011, reduce the size of hypoxic
area in Long Island Sound (i.e.,
defined as the area in which the
long-term average maximum July-
September dissolved oxygen level is
<3mg/l) by 25 percent; reduce aver-
age duration of maximum hypoxic
event by 25 percent. (2005 baseline
derived from 19-year averages as of
December 2005;68 size: 203 mi2;
duration: 58 days.)
• By 2011, restore or protect an addi-
tional 300 acres of coastal habitat,
including tidal wetlands, dunes,
riparian buffers, and freshwater wet-
lands from the 2005 baseline. (2005
cumulative baseline: 562 acres
restored and 150 acres protected.)69
• By 2011, reopen an additional
50 miles of river and stream corridor
to anadromous fish passage from the
2005 baseline through removal of
dams and barriers or installation of
by-pass structures such as fishways.
(2005 cumulative baseline: 81 miles
reopened.)70
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
Sub-objective 4.3.7: Restore and Protect
the South Florida Ecosystem. Protect and
maintain the South Florida ecosystem,
including the Everglades and coral reef
ecosystems.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, achieve "no net loss" of
stony coral cover (mean percent
stony coral cover) in the Florida Keys
National Marine Sanctuary
(FKNMS) and in the coastal waters
of Bade, Broward, and Palm Beach
Counties, Florida, working with all
stakeholders (federal, state, regional,
and local). (2005 baseline: Mean
percent stony coral cover 6.7 percent
in FKNMS and 5.9 percent in
Southeast Florida.)71
Through 2011, beginning in 2008,
annually maintain the overall health
and functionality of sea grass beds in
the FKNMS as measured by the long-
term sea grass monitoring project
that addresses composition and abun-
dance, productivity, and nutrient
availability. (The 2005 baseline
index of sea grass health will be
available in December 2006.)72
• Through 2011, beginning in 2008,
annually maintain the overall water
quality of the near shore and coastal
waters of the FKNMS. (2005 base-
line: For reef sites, chlorophyll less
than or equal to 0.2 ug/1 and vertical
attenuation coefficient for downward
irradiance [kj, i.e., light attenuation]
less than or equal to 0.13 per meter;
for all sites in FKNMS, dissolved
inorganic nitrogen less than or
equal to 0.75 micromolar and total
phosphorus less than or equal
to 0.2 micromolar.)73
• Through 2011, beginning in 2008,
improve the water quality of the
Everglades ecosystem as measured by
total phosphorus, including meeting
the 10 parts per billion (ppb) total
phosphorus criterion throughout the
Everglades Protection Area marsh
and the effluent limits to be estab-
lished for discharges from storm
water treatment areas. (2005 base-
line: Average annual geometric mean
phosphorus concentrations were
5 ppb in the Everglades National
Park, 10 ppb in Water Conservation
3A, 13 ppb in the Loxahatchee
National Wildlife Refuge, and
18 ppb in Water Conservation Area
2A; annual average flow- weighted
total phosphorus discharges from
storm water treatment areas ranged
from 13 ppb for area 3/4 and 98 ppb
for area 1W)74
Sub'objective 4.3.8: Restore and Protect
the Puget Sound Basin. By 2011, improve
water quality, air quality, and minimize the
adverse impacts of rapid development in the
Puget Sound Basin.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, improve water quality
and enable the lifting of harvest
restrictions in 1,000 acres of shellfish
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Objective 4.3: Restore and Protect Critical Ecosystems
bed growing areas impacted by
degraded or declining water quality.
(Baseline: As of January 2006,
approximately 30,000 acres of shell-
fish bed growing areas had harvest
restrictions due to water quality
impairments in Puget Sound.)75
• By 2011, remediate 200 acres of
prioritized contaminated sediments.
(Baseline: As of January 2006,
approximately 5,000 acres of
remaining contaminated sediments
required some level of
remediation.)76
• By 2011, restore 3,500 acres of
tidally- and seasonally-influenced
estuarine wetlands. (Baseline: A total
of approximately 45,000 acres of
intertidal and near-shore habitat
were identified by state, tribal, and
local groups as potential restoration
sites in the 2006 Puget Sound
Near-Shore Restoration Site
Inventory Database.)77
• By 2011, reduce total diesel emissions
in the Puget Sound airshed by
8 percent through coordinated diesel
emission mitigation efforts. (Baseline
will be available in December 2006.)78
Sub-objective 4.3.9: Restore and Protect
the Columbia River Basin. By 2011, prevent
water pollution and improve and protect
water quality and ecosystems in the
Columbia River Basin to reduce risks to
human health and the environment.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, protect, enhance, or restore
13,000 acres of wetland habitat
and 3,000 acres of upland habitat in
the Lower Columbia River water-
shed. (2005 baseline: 96,770 acres
of wetland and upland habitat
available for protection, enhance-
ment, or restoration.)
• By 2011, clean up 150 acres of
known highly contaminated
sediments. (Baseline: 400 acres of
known highly contaminated sedi-
ments in the main-stem of the
Columbia River and Lower
Willamette River as of 2006.)
• By 2011, demonstrate a 10 percent
reduction in mean concentration
of contaminants of concern
found in water and fish tissue.
(Chemical-specific baselines
will be available in 2006. )79
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
RESTORING AND PROTECTING ECOSYSTEMS
EPA protects, sustains, and restores the
health of natural habitats and ecosystems by
identifying and evaluating problem areas,
developing tools, and improving community
capacity to address problems. Over the next
5 years, we will target wetlands, estuaries, and
high-priority areas such as the Great Lakes,
Chesapeake Bay, Gulf of Mexico, Long Island
Sound, South Florida ecosystem, Puget Sound
Basin, and Columbia River. Our place-based
ecosystem protection strategies focus on criti-
cal watersheds to develop and implement
water quality control practices and design
other tools for managing ecosystems that can
be transferred to other areas nationwide.
Photo: National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration/
Department of Commerce
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
INCREASING WETLANDS
Healthy wetlands protect water quality,
provide habitat for fish and wildlife, store
floodwater, and reduce the erosive potential
of surface water. However, since the 1700s,
the United States has lost more than 115
million acres of wetlands to development,
agriculture, and other uses.80 Excessive sedi-
mentation, nutrient over-enrichment,
pesticides, invasive species, habitat loss, and
fragmentation are degrading wetlands.81
And many of the wetlands we have created,
while beneficial, fail to fully replace the
diverse plant and animal communities of
wetlands lost. To help address this issue, EPA
and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(the Corps) jointly proposed a rule in 2006
that sets clear criteria for compensatory miti-
gation of wetland impacts authorized by
Clean Water Act permits.
EPA is also cooperating and collaborating
with federal, state, and tribal governments
and other stakeholders to achieve the
President's goal,
set in 2004, to
restore, improve,
and protect 3
million acres of
wetlands by 2009.82
(Progress under the
President's Initiative
is reported annually
in a report by the
Council on
Environmental
Quality, "Conserving
America's Wetlands,:
Implementing the
President's Goal.")83
Key EPA programs
supporting this
effort include
the Five Star
Restoration
Challenge Grants,
the National Estuary Program, and the
Nonpoint Source Management Program.
Additionally, EPA works with the Corps
to ensure "no net loss" of wetlands under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. A key
area of cooperation is applying the 404(b)(l)
guidelines requiring that discharges of
dredged or fill material into U.S. waters be
avoided and minimized to the extent practi-
cable and that unavoidable impacts be fully
compensated. EPA will continue collaborat-
ing with the Corps to develop a set of
science-based standards for all types of miti-
gation that compensate for wetland and
other aquatic resource destruction.84 We will
also work with the Corps to enhance data
collection; track Section 404 permitted
projects and associated compensatory mitiga-
tion; and provide this information to federal,
state, and tribal agencies and the public.
EPA will continue to build state and
tribal capacity to measure wetland function
and condition. Broad-based, integrated moni-
toring and assessment programs inform
decision makers, target restoration activities,
and help us address significant stressors.
Through Wetland Program development
grants, EPA provides technical and financial
support to strengthen state and tribal regula-
tion, monitoring, restoration, water quality
standards, mitigation compliance, and
partnership-building. Programs such as the
Five Star Restoration Challenge Grant
Program,85 regional geographic initiatives,86
targeted watershed grants,87 the National
Estuary Program, and nonpoint source
grants88 provide funding, technical support,
and information to help communities imple-
ment riparian, coastal, and wetland
restoration projects. We are also integrating
wetlands protection into our Clean Water
and Brownfields Programs.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
owow/wetlands.
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Objective 4.3: Restore and Protect Critical Ecosystems
RESTORING ESTUARIES
Estuaries are among the most biologically
productive ecosystems on earth, providing
numerous ecological, economic, cultural, and
aesthetic benefits and services. They are also
among the most threatened ecosystems,
largely as a result of rapid growth and devel-
opment.89 Estuaries tend to accumulate
sediments, nutrients, and other pollutants
from adjacent and upstream land-based
sources, profoundly affecting water quality,
habitats, living resources, and human health.
Overuse of natural resources and conflicts
among recreational and commercial users
have also resulted in a host of challenges to
estuarine resources.
EPA's National Estuary Program (NEP)
provides inclusive, community-based
planning and action in 28 nationally signifi-
cant estuaries selected by Congress and the
states' governors. EPA will support and
monitor all 28 NEPs in implementing
approved comprehensive conservation and
management plans, which identify more than
2,000 priority actions needed to protect the
estuaries and restore estuarine resources. In
addition, we support broad priorities identi-
fied by the NEP: developing approaches to
identify and rank priority habitats; providing
tools to integrate local and regional plans for
growth with stormwater management;
supporting development of TMDLs for coastal
waters; developing and implementing nutrient
management strategies, including develop-
ment of nutrient water quality criteria;
addressing problems of invasive species; and
reducing wet weather runoff from urban
and agricultural areas.
Healthy estuarine ecosystems also depend
on high-quality habitat. Through interagency
partnerships with federal resource agencies,
such as the Estuary Habitat Restoration
Council and Coastal America, we will help to
protect habitat on an ecosystem-wide basis.
ESTUARIES IN THE
NATIONAL ESTUARY PROGRAM
Albemarle-Pamlico
Sounds, NC
assachusetts B
Barataria-Terrebonne, LA Morro Bay CA
Barnegat Bay, NJ Narragansett Bay, Rl
Buzzards Bay, MA New Hampshire I
Casco Bay, ME NH
Charlotte Harbor; FL New York/New Jersey
Coastal Bend Bays and Harbo^ NY/NJ
Estuaries.TX Peconic Bay, NY
Lower Columbia River; Puget Sound, WA
OR/WA San Francisco Bay, CA
Delaware Estuary, DE/NJ San Juan Ba/i PR
Delaware Inland Bays, DE Santa Monica Ba/i CA
Galveston BayTX Sarasota Bay, FL
Indian River Lagoon, FL Tampa Ba/ FL
Long Island Sound, NY/CT Ti
Maryland Coastal Bays, MD
amook Bay, OR
Da.gov/owow/estuar
GREAT LAKES
The Great Lakes are the largest system
of surface freshwater on earth, containing
20 percent of the world's surface freshwater
and accounting for about 84 percent of the
surface freshwater in North America. The
watershed includes 2 nations, 8 American
states, a Canadian province, more than
40 tribes, and more than Vic111 of the
U.S. population.
While certain persistent toxic
substances (PTS) have been reduced signifi-
cantly in the Great Lakes Basin ecosystem
over the past 30 years, they continue to be
present at levels that threaten human and
wildlife health, warrant fish consumption
advisories in all 5 lakes, and disrupt a way of
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
life for many in the Basin.90 To address such
problems, the President established two major
Great Lakes efforts: a "Great Lakes
Interagency Task Force"91 and a Great Lakes
"Regional Collaboration of National
Significance" (GLRC).92 The Great Lakes
Task Force brings together 10 Cabinet depart-
ment and federal agency heads to coordinate
restoration of the Great Lakes, focusing on
outcomes, such as cleaner water and sustain-
able fisheries, and targeting measurable
results. In December 2005, the GLRC devel-
oped a Great Lakes Regional Collaboration
Strategy93 that federal agencies are using to
guide their Great Lakes efforts. For its part,
EPA is coordinating responses to new aquatic
invasive species; developing a system for
tracking progress toward GLRC goals; devel-
oping policy on managing peak flows at
sewage treatment plants; conducting surveil-
lance for emerging chemicals of concern; and
implementing the Great Lakes Legacy Act.
The Great Lakes Legacy Act targets
additional resources to clean up contaminated
sediments, a significant source of PTS. Work
conducted under the Legacy Act to reduce
and eliminate PTS also supports the Great
Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy. This
international effort applies voluntary and
regulatory pollution prevention tools to mer-
cury, PCBs, dioxins/furans, certain canceled
pesticides, and other targeted substances.
Both the Legacy Act and the Great Lakes
Binational Toxics Strategy support EPA's
work with states to delist all 31 of the
remaining Areas of Concern by 2025.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
greatlakes.
CHESAPEAKE BAY
EPA's Chesapeake Bay work is based on a
unique regional partnership formed to direct
and conduct restoration of the Bay and its
tidal tributaries. Partners include Maryland;
Virginia; Pennsylvania; Delaware; New York;
West Virginia; the District of Columbia; the
Chesapeake Bay Commission, a tri-state
legislative body; EPA, which represents the
federal government; and participating citizen
advisory groups. Chesapeake 2000, a compre-
hensive and far-reaching agreement, guides
restoration and protection efforts through
2010, and focuses on improving water quality.95
Our challenge is to reduce pollution and
restore aquatic habitat to the extent that the
Bay's waters can be removed from the Clean
Water Act "impaired waters" list.
We will work with our partners to
improve two key measures of Bay water
quality: restoring submerged aquatic
vegetation (SAV) and attaining the
dissolved oxygen (DO) standards in the
Bay's tidal waters. The Chesapeake Bay
Program's long-term goal for SAV restoration
is 185,000 acres and long-term goal for
DO restoration is 100 percent attainment
of DO standards in all tidal waters of the
Bay. To achieve these long-term goals, Bay
watershed models estimate that long-term
annual nitrogen loadings must be reduced by
162.5 million pounds, phosphorus reduced by
14.36 million pounds, and sediment reduced by
1.69 million tons per year from 1985 levels.96
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Objective 4.3: Restore and Protect Critical Ecosystems
To achieve water quality standards in the
Chesapeake Bay as soon as possible, EPA is
committed to increasing the current pace of
restoration. Working with our Bay Program
partners, we will identify opportunities to
reduce nutrient and sediment loads and find
new economies and innovations to accelerate
progress dramatically. A key strategy to
reduce nutrient discharges is implementing
advanced wastewater treatment. Another key
strategy to reduce nitrogen, phosphorus, and
sediment loadings is restoring and protecting
riparian forests that prevent sediment
and nutrient pollution from entering
waterways from the land. Implementing best
agricultural management practices to
reduce nutrients and sediment is also key
to achieving Chesapeake Bay goals, and
will require close cooperation with U.S.
Department of Agriculture. We will continue
to work with other federal agencies and states
on related initiatives to protect and restore
critical Bay watershed habitat and improve
fisheries management.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
region3/chesapeake.
GULF OF MEXICO
The Gulf of Mexico's estuaries and near
coastal waters support fisheries and wildlife
habitats that contribute to the national and
Gulf state economies. However, population
growth, land development, and coastal and
commercial activities are threatening the
sustainability of the Gulf's marine resources.
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita also wrought
widespread environmental harm in 2005.
EPA's Gulf of Mexico Program97 helps
Gulf states and stakeholders work in partner-
ship to develop a regional, ecosystem-based
framework for restoring and protecting the
Gulf. The 5 Gulf states have also formed
a Gulf of Mexico Alliance98 to increase
collaboration, and 13 federal agencies
have organized a regional partnership99
to support the alliance.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
In 2006, the Gulf of Mexico Alliance
developed the Governors' Action Plan for
Healthy and Resilient Coasts100 that identifies
five key priority coastal and ocean issues that
are regionally significant and can be effec-
tively addressed through cooperation at the
local, state, and federal levels: (1) water qual-
ity for healthy beaches and shellfish beds,
(2) wetland and coastal conservation and
restoration, (3) identification and characteri-
zation of Gulf habitats for management
decision making, (4) reductions in nutrient
loadings, and (5) strategic environmental
education across the five-state region.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/gmpo.
LONG ISLAND SOUND
EPA is working with the States of New
York and Connecticut and other federal,
state, and local Long Island Sound
Management Conference partners to imple-
ment a comprehensive conservation and
management plan (CCMP) to restore the
Long Island Sound.101 Since levels of dissolved
oxygen are critical to the health of aquatic
life and viable public use of the Sound, the
CCMP focuses on controlling nitrogen
discharges to meet applicable water
quality standards.
A bi-state nitrogen reduction agreement
relies on flexible and innovative approaches,
notably "bubble" management zones and
exchange ratios that allow sewage treatment
plant operators to "trade" nitrogen reduction
obligations with each other. This approach
meets water quality improvement goals while
allowing plant operators to save an estimated
$800 million by allocating reductions to
those plants where they can be achieved
most economically.102
We are also working with Management
Conference partners to restore degraded
habitats; reopen rivers and streams to
anadromous fish passage; improve riparian
buffers; restore SAV in key embayments; reduce
the impact of toxic substances, pathogens, and
floatable debris on the ecology; and promote
environmental education, management, and
stewardship throughout the watershed.103
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
regionOl/eco/lis.
SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM
The South Florida ecosystem encompass-
es 3 national parks, more than 10 national
wildlife refuges, a national preserve, and a
national marine sanctuary. It is home to two
Native American nations and it
supports the largest wilderness area east of
the Mississippi River, the only living coral
barrier reef adjacent to the United States,
and the largest commercial and sport fisheries
in Florida. But rapid population growth is
threatening the health of this vital
ecosystem. South Florida is home to about
8 million people, more than the populations
of 39 individual states. Another 2 million
people are expected to settle in the area over
the next 10 to 20 years. Fifty percent of the
region's wetlands have been lost to suburban
and agricultural development, and the altered
hydrology and water management throughout
the region have had a major impact on the
ecosystem.
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Objective 4.3: Restore and Protect Critical Ecosystems
EPA is working in partnership with
several local, regional, state, and federal agen-
cies to ensure the long-term sustainability of
the region's varied natural resources, while also
providing for extensive agricultural operations
and an expanding population. EPA's South
Florida Geographic Initiative (SFGI) is
designed to protect and restore communities
and ecosystems affected by environmental
problems.104 SFGI efforts include activities
related to the Section 404 wetlands protection
program; the comprehensive Everglades
Restoration Program; the water quality protec-
tion program for the Florida Keys National
Marine Sanctuary; the Southeast Florida Coral
Reef Initiative, directed by the U.S. Coral Reef
Task Force; the Brownfields Program; and a
number of other waste management programs.
EPA will continue to implement the
South Florida Assessment Project, an ecosys-
tem assessment of the Everglades, and to work
with stakeholders to develop and implement
community-based approaches to mitigate
sources of pollution and cumulative risk.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
region4/water/southflorida.
PUGET SOUND BASIN
The Puget Sound Basin is the largest
population and commercial center in the
Pacific Northwest, supporting a vital system
of international ports, transportation systems,
and defense installations. The ecosystem
encompasses roughly 20 rivers and 2,500
miles of sheltered inland waters that provide
habitat to hundreds of species of marine
mammals, fish, and sea birds. Puget Sound
salmon landings average more than 19 mil-
lion pounds per year and support an average
of 578,000 sport fishing trips each year.
However, while the Puget Sound currently
leads U.S. waterways in shellfish production,
30,000 acres of shellfish beds have been
closed to harvest since 1980. These closures
affect local economies and cultural and sub-
sistence needs for these traditional resources.
Excess nutrients have created hypoxic
zones that further impair shellfish and finfish
populations. In addition, recent monitoring
assessments indicate that marine species in the
Puget Sound have high levels of toxic con-
tamination. Almost 5,700 acres of submerged
land (about 9 mi2) are currently classified as
contaminated with toxics and another 24,000
acres as at least partially contaminated. And
additional pollutants are being released:
approximately 1 million pounds of toxics are
released into the water and 5 million pounds
into the air each year, with many pollutants
finding their way into Puget Sound.
To address these issues, EPA is working
with other federal agencies, states, and tribes
to protect local watersheds and near-shore
habitat; to protect shellfish-growing areas; to
reduce nutrient and toxic discharges; and
to develop more comprehensive storm water
management programs. We are taking action
to reduce short- and long-term discharges
of toxics through diesel emissions, which are a
major source of pollutants into the Sound. An
essential component of our strategy for pro-
tecting Puget Sound will be addressing
contaminated estuary bottom sediments while
developing more effective source control
strategies. Working with our state and other
NEP partners, we are also initiating a compre-
hensive toxics source control strategy, and we
expect to have an expanded toxics source con-
trol action agenda in place by 2008.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
pugetsound.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN
More than 1,200 miles long, the
Columbia River spans portions of Oregon,
Washington, Idaho, Wyoming, Nevada,
Utah, Montana, and a substantial portion of
British Columbia. The 260,000 square mile
Columbia River Basin comprises ecosystems
that are home to a variety of biologically
significant plants and animals and supports
industries vital to the Pacific Northwest,
including sport and commercial fisheries,
agriculture, transportation, recreation, and
electrical power generation.
Columbia River salmon and steelhead
runs—once the largest on earth—are now a
fraction of their original size. EPA studies and
state monitoring programs have found signifi-
cant levels of toxins in fish and the waters
they inhabit, including dichloro-diphenyl-
trichloroethane (DDT), PCBs, and
dieldrin.105 To address this problem, we will
continue working with Oregon, Washington,
Idaho, Columbia Basin tribal governments,
the Lower Columbia River Estuary
Partnership, local governments, citizen
groups, industry, and other federal agencies.
Together we have launched the Columbia
River toxics strategy to identify and clean up
contaminated sediments; restore critical wet-
lands; and reduce toxins in water, land, and
fish. Within available resources, EPA, states,
and tribes are systematically expanding such
key activities as fish, water, and sediment
monitoring; pesticide stewardship partner-
ships; targeted pesticide/toxics collections;
and precision agriculture. We are implement-
ing TMDLs by reducing sediment loads and
restoring riparian areas, and we are cleaning
up the Portland Harbor Superfund site and
PCB contamination in the Columbia River
at Bradford Island.
The NEP also plays a key role in
addressing toxics and restoring critical wet-
lands in the Lower Columbia River estuary.
Through the NEP, we will identify contami-
nants of concern, identify data bases that can
provide baseline data and establish new mon-
itoring efforts to fill data gaps, and identify
and implement best management practices
for reducing contaminants of concern.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/
Reg ion 10/columb ia.
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Objective 4.4: Enhance Science and Research
OBJECTIVE 4.4: ENHANCE SCIENCE AND RESEARCH
THROUGH 2011, IDENTIFY AND SYNTHESIZE THE BEST AVAILABLE SCIENTIFIC
INFORMATION, MODELS, METHODS, AND ANALYSES TO SUPPORT AGENCY GUIDANCE
AND POLICY DECISIONS RELATED TO THE HEALTH OF PEOPLE, COMMUNITIES, AND
ECOSYSTEMS. FOCUS RESEARCH ON PESTICIDES AND CHEMICAL TOXICOLOGY; GLOBAL
CHANGE; AND COMPREHENSIVE, CROSS-CUTTING STUDIES OF HUMAN, COMMUNITY,
AND ECOSYSTEM HEALTH.
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
ENHANCING SCIENCE AND RESEARCH
To help us understand environmental
problems and support innovative approaches
and solutions, research must be forward-
looking. EPA's research programs support our
goals for protecting and restoring communities
and ecosystems by developing computational
toxicology, bioinformatics, and related tech-
nologies; developing environmental and
human health monitoring systems and
indicators, such as the emerging Global Earth
Observation System of Systems (GEOSS); and
improving the utility of research results by
incorporating uncertainty analysis.
HUMAN HEALTH RESEARCH
The research that EPA is conducting
under the Human Health Research Plan
(HHRP) will enable risk assessors and risk
managers to reduce their reliance on default
assumptions in human health risk assessment.
By addressing uncertainties in risk assess-
ment, HHRP will support a number of
environmental laws, including FQPA,
SDWA, and CAA; address a variety of
national environmental program research
priorities; and assist risk assessors, such as
those associated with the Integrated Risk
Information System (IRIS) and National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
We are also conducting research to set
priorities and screen chemicals. Methods,
models, and data derived from this work will
help us understand the basis for differential
response to chemicals at various stages in life.
EPA will focus a portion of this work on
assessing differential exposure and response
in children and another portion on older
populations. We will also emphasize the
potential long-term health effects following
developmental exposure to environmental
agents. Extramural sources that are jointly
funded by EPA and the National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences will provide
research in environmental influences on
neurodevelopment, asthma, and disease.
Other lines of research will help us develop
principles for evaluating the effectiveness of
risk management decisions at the local and
regional level. We will collaborate with the
Centers for Disease Control and other federal
agencies to accomplish this work.
ECOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
Under our
Ecological Research
Program, we will
develop analytical
tools to help
evaluate the
stressors that devel-
opment and urban
sprawl place on
ecosystems and
determine how we can efficiently control and
reduce harmful effects. Improving our under-
standing of indicators of ecological condition
and of the services ecosystems provide will
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
help us develop assessment tools for local
decision makers. More states and tribes will
be able to use a common monitoring design
and appropriate indicators to determine the
status of resources, trends, and program effec-
tiveness. To inform our decision making, we
must closely coordinate ecological research
with environmental research, human health
research, and public health, and these con-
nections offer extensive opportunities for
local partnerships.
GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE RESEARCH
Our Global Change Research Program
primarily assesses the potential consequences
of global change on air quality, water quality,
ecosystems, and human health in the United
States. It will provide scientific information
about the impact of global change on specific
geographic areas, as well as models for evalu-
ating and implementing adaptation policies
to protect air and water quality.
This research will support two goals of
the U.S. Climate Change Science Program
(CCSP): understanding the sensitivity and
adaptability of different natural and managed
ecosystems and human systems to climate
and related global changes (CCSP Goal 4),
and exploring the uses and identifying the
limits of evolving knowledge to manage risks
and opportunities related to climate variability
and change (CCSP Goal 5).
Like the CCSP, EPA's Global Program
is emphasizing improved decision making
and adaptive management. Toward this
end, we will develop a dynamic "decision
inventory" that identifies different classes of
climate-sensitive decisions in different
regions of the country and evaluates the
effectiveness of this scientific information in
informing those decisions.
ENDOCRINE DISRUPTORS RESEARCH
Over the last several years, concern has
grown about exposure to endocrine-disrupting,
or hormonally active, chemicals. Evidence
suggests that exposure to chemicals that
mimic hormones (endocrine disrupters) may
cause adverse health effects in wildlife and
may affect human health as well.
Our endocrine disrupter research will
reduce uncertainty about effects, exposure,
assessment, and management of endocrine
disrupters. It will help us to determine the
impact that endocrine disrupters may have
on humans, wildlife, and the environment
and will encourage screening and testing
assays. Research to understand the effects of
endocrine disrupters has shifted from animal
exposure testing to the relatively new field of
computational toxicological research. In
addition, our increasing ability to sequence
the human genome has led to a rapid devel-
opment of laboratory methods to assess gene
expression on a genome-wide basis, and
provided additional tools for endocrine
disrupter research. Continued expansion of
this field may also facilitate research into the
effects of endocrine disrupters.
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Objective 4.4: Enhance Science and Research
HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
RESEARCH
The Human Health Risk Assessment
Program provides state-of-the-science health
hazard assessment information on hazardous
substances that are accorded high priority by
EPA, state, and local risk assessors. This
research will help us to improve the quality
and objectivity of health assessments.
We will continue to use IRIS, the Air
Quality Criteria Document (AQCD), and
other assessments to support EPA's decisions.
For example, we are revising AQCDs for
ambient air pollutants (as mandated in the
Clean Air Act) to reflect the best available
scientific information on the effects on health
and the environment from exposure to these
pollutants, and we will incorporate this infor-
mation in reviewing and promulgating
NAAQS. We are working to produce more
assessment information and to enhance its
quality by incorporating the latest advances
in risk assessment science. These activities
are coordinated across EPA research and
program offices through the IRIS consensus
review, the Risk Assessment Forum, and
other processes.
COMPUTATIONAL TOXICOLOGY RESEARCH
Computational toxicology integrates
modern computing and information tech-
nologies with molecular biology and
chemistry to help set priorities for data
requirements and chemical risk assessments.
EPA's National Center for Computational
Toxicology will generate methods, models, and
data needed for better, faster, and cheaper
approaches to testing chemicals and
emerging technologies, such as bio- and
nanotechnology. Associated research will
help in assessing cumulative effects on
humans from multiple exposures and in
identifying and characterizing diseases
resulting from changing environmental
factors and factors such as pharmacological
exposure. Using these tools, scientists can
gain a finer understanding of the hazards and
risks of a large number of chemicals.
ToxCast, a forecasting tool, will provide EPA
programs the ability to prioritize, screen, and
assess the potential hazards of chemicals
more rapidly than do current methods.
Customized DNA arrays and tools for
modeling and virtual prototyping are two
important research products that enable this
scanning to be done efficiently and at greatly
reduced expense. EPA scientists are leading
this new field of environmental protection,
and we will apply new capabilities gained
from this research to future efforts.
MERCURY RESEARCH
EPA's Mercury Research
Program will provide us a better
understanding of the transport and
fate of mercury, from its release to
its effects. The program is focusing
on several key questions:
• How much of the methyl
mercury in fish consumed
in the United States is
contributed by emissions,
compared to other sources?
• How much of the mercury emissions
from coal-fired utility boilers and other
combustion systems can be reduced?
• What is the magnitude of mercury
released from non-combustion sources?
• What risks do exposure to methyl
mercury pose to wildlife species and
other significant ecological receptors?
• How does exposure to environmental
sources of mercury affect the health
of the most susceptible human
sub-populations?
• How can we most effectively inform
susceptible populations about these
risks?
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
We are also focusing research on increas-
ing the accuracy, precision, and effectiveness
of continuous emission monitors. These results
will help us evaluate the effectiveness of the
new Clean Air Mercury Rule. We are coordi-
nating this research across several of EPA's
programs and internationally, for example,
through the United Nations Environment
Program Fate and Transport Partnership.
Another high priority for the Mercury
Program will be providing information to
states and utilities on alternative control
technologies. Researchers are also working
to identify mercury deposition "hot spots"
that already exist or may occur as a result of
market trading of mercury emissions.
HOMELAND
SECURITY
RESEARCH
Threat and con-
sequence assessment
research focuses on
rapid evaluation of
chemical, biological,
and radiological
risks associated with
a terrorist threat or
attack. This research
will enable better
emergency and fol-
low-up responses by developing products for
locating, collecting, and analyzing samples;
protecting emergency responders, the public,
and the environment; decontaminating build-
ings; and disposing of contaminated materials.
EPA researchers will be developing and refin-
ing advisory levels for various contaminants
of concern, improving risk assessment meth-
ods and communication tools, and supporting
emergency and follow-up responders.
Our water infrastructure protection
research will continue to focus on treatment
operations; drinking water distribution
systems; and, to a lesser degree, wastewater
collection, treatment operations, and treated
water discharge. This work involves laboratory
and field testing and evaluating technologies
to detect, contain, treat, and recover from
intentional attacks on drinking water and
wastewater facilities.
Decontamination and consequence
management research will support rapid and
cost-effective remediation and restoration of
buildings and broad outdoor areas. This
research involves laboratory and field testing
and evaluation of technologies to decontami-
nate and dispose of materials and areas
affected by intentional attacks.
We will provide the results of our
homeland security research to the emergency
and remedial response community, elected and
appointed officials, and the general public.
SAFE PESTICIDES AND PRODUCTS RESEARCH
By developing and applying the latest
molecular and computational approaches,
EPA's Safe Pesticides/Safe Products (SP2)
Research Program will provide new tools for
interpreting exposure, hazard identification,
and dose-response information, strengthening
our ability to develop risk assessment meth-
ods to protect birds, fish, and other wildlife.
This research has become increasingly linked
to advances in computational toxicology.
Scientific progress in sequencing the human
genome has rapidly led to laboratory
methods for assessing gene expression on a
genome-wide basis, which will contribute to
the tools available for SP2 research.
EPA researchers will be developing
methods for extrapolation among wildlife
species and exposure scenarios of concern
(e.g., exposure of endangered species) to
advance the scientific foundation for con-
ducting probabilistic risk assessments for
wildlife populations. SP2 research will also
contribute to evaluating potential ecological
effects of biotechnology products, developing
risk management approaches, and developing
methods for assessing the potential
allergenicity of genetically engineered plants.
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Human Capital
HUMAN CAPITAL
To achieve our goals for healthy
communities and ecosystems, EPA will require
a workforce with a well-balanced combination
of skills, experience, and expertise. We will
need toxicologists with expertise in chemical
testing, registration, and monitoring; biolo-
gists to evaluate the exposure impact of
chemical releases on wetlands; specialized
chemical engineers to reduce risks at chemical
facilities; and modelers to evaluate risks of
chemicals to populations and fragile ecosys-
tems. We have also identified a gap in the
number of economists, epidemiologists,
human exposure modelers, and hydrologists
needed to fill mission-critical scientist/
researcher positions.
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
Many of our strategic targets for protect-
ing, sustaining, or restoring the health of
people, communities, and ecosystems rely on
measures or indicators of changes in the envi-
ronment or human health, such as habitat and
water quality conditions or blood lead levels.
Collecting and analyzing these data are often
expensive and time-consuming. Moreover,
because changes in environmental and
health conditions that result from EPA
programs may not be evident for several
years, it is not always practicable or useful to
collect these data annually. Consequently,
while these environmental and health
outcome measures and data are excellent
indicators of EPA's long-term performance,
the Agency also uses other shorter-term
measures and data to manage programs.
The Brownfields Program has developed
a new strategic target for the acres of brown-
fields made ready for reuse. This new
strategic target better represents the outcome
of the Brownfields Program than the program's
long-standing strategic target of brownfield
properties assessed. The number of brownfield
properties assessed will eventually be tracked
only as an annual performance measure
rather than as a strategic target.
Another new strategic target set under
this goal involves human body-burden of
pesticides. It embodies metrics presented as
environmental indicators in EPA's forthcoming
Report on the Environment. We have also
incorporated in this Strategic Plan most of the
long-term, outcome-oriented measures cur-
rently used in the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) Program Assessment Rating
Tool (PART) assessments of various pesti-
cide, toxics, brownfields, and geographic
programs.
Measuring progress toward research goals
can be challenging, not only for EPA but for
science and research programs across the
government. We use a number of objective
measures of customer satisfaction, product
impact and quality, and efficiency to assess
our results. For example, we rely on expert
review panel ratings on the extent to which
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
clients use EPA research products; surveys
designed to gather data on their utility and
effect, and analyses that can demonstrate
actual use of EPA research products.
IMPROVING PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
As we considered revising and improving
performance measures for this Strategic Plan,
we also assessed longer-term opportunities
for developing more results-based, outcome-
oriented commitments. Under our commu-
nities and ecosystems goal, for example, we
will focus collaborative research plans to bet-
ter represent risks to human health and
ecosystems from toxic substances and pesti-
cides. We are working with the Board of
Scientific Counselors and others to develop
a means for using independent expert review
to assess the success of all of our research
programs. We also have identified as a priority
developing a Chesapeake Bay Water Quality
Index to represent the Bay's aquatic health
more comprehensively.
We are also integrating environmental
justice considerations under each of our
Strategic Plan goals for the first time. In
particular, we have identified eight national
environmental justice priorities as deserving
of special attention.107 While this Strategic
Plan identifies actions and/or strategies to
address these priorities, we can make further
progress in developing tailored targets and
measures to evaluate changes in areas with
potential environmental justice concerns.
Our ability to target resources and measure
progress will improve as we gain experience,
develop new tools, and further integrate
environmental justice considerations into
EPA's work. In addition to the performance
measures already established, we will assess
progress with respect to the following national
environmental justice priorities: asthma
attacks, exposure to air toxics, blood lead
levels, fish and shellfish safe to eat, water safe
to drink, and revitalization of brownfields
and contaminated sites.
USING FEEDBACK FROM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS
AND PROGRAM EVALUATIONS
Programs supporting our goal of healthy
communities and ecosystems are assessed in
three ways: internal EPA program evalua-
tions, including those conducted by EPA's
Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and
Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC); OMB
PART reviews; and external assessments by
organizations such as the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) and the
National Academy of Sciences (NAS).
INTERNAL PROGRAM EVALUATIONS
The BOSC Human Health
Subcommittee evaluated the Agency's
Human Health Research Program's four long-
term goals, which are related to the use of
information in risk assessment, aggregate and
cumulative risk, susceptible sub-populations,
and public health outcomes. In response
to BOSC recommendations, we increased
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Using Feedback from Performance Assessments and Program Evaluations
communication and collaboration among
research areas, developed specific peer review
goals, and articulated a decision-making
process.
Several program offices are developing
program-specific evaluations. For example,
the Brownfields Program is reviewing head-
quarters and regional operations to obtain
feedback on program objectives, ensure
accountability, evaluate decision-making
processes, and identify best practices. The
review, to be completed in FY 2008, is
intended to enhance program quality overall.
OIG has conducted extensive reviews of
programs supporting the healthy communi-
ties and ecosystems goal. Over the past
several years, OIG has:
• Assessed how well EPA has integrated
environmental justice in our opera-
tions and provided recommendations
for reaffirming our commitment
to environmental justice and
strengthening planning efforts.
• Reviewed our implementation of
the Food Safety Act and provided
recommendations for considering
sub-populations, responding to
petitions, and increasing public
participation.
• Assessed implementation of the
Brownfields Program and provided
recommendations for managing
resources and improving the grant
application and selection process.
PROGRAM ASSESSMENT
RATING TOOL (PART)
New Chemicals Program—rated
moderately effective.
Existing Chemicals Program—rated
adequate.
Pesticide Registration—rated
adequate.
Brownfields Revitilization—rated
adequate.
U.S.-Mexico Border Water
Infrastructure—rated adequate.
The Ecological Research
Program—rated ineffective.
(The program is conducting follow-up
actions to address this issue.)
Human Health Research-
adequate.
-rated
Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals
Research—rated adequate.
A f
EXTERNAL EVALUATIONS
Many of the programs supporting Goal 4
have been assessed under OMB's PART
process. Summaries of all completed PART
studies are available at www.whitehouse.gov/
omb/expectmore/. Among the programs
evaluated were:
EPA participates with outside organiza-
tions, such as GAO and NAS, in evaluating
program effectiveness and recommending
improvements in program management and
policies. GAO has conducted numerous eval-
uations of programs supporting the healthy
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
communities and ecosystems goal; a complete
list is available at www.gao.gov/docsearch/
repandtest.html. Some examples include:
• Chemical Regulation: Options Exist
to Improve EPA's Ability to Assess
Health Risks and Manage its
Chemical Review Process
(June 2005).
• Brownfield Redevelopment:
Stakeholders Cite Additional
Measures that Could Complement
EPA's Efforts to Clean Up and
Redevelop Properties (April 2005).
• Wetlands: Corps of Engineers Needs
to Better Support its Decisions for
Not Asserting Jurisdiction
(September 2005).
• Great Lakes: Organizational
Leadership and Restoration Goals
Need to be Better Defined for
Monitoring Restoration Progress
(September 2004).
• Chesapeake Bay: Improved Strategies
Are Needed to Better Assess, Report,
and Manage Restoration Progress
(October 2005).
• Columbia River Basin: A Multi-lay-
ered Collection of Directives and
Plans Guides Federal Fish and
Wildlife Activities (June 2004).
NAS has developed reports and recom-
mendations on a range of community and
ecosystem issues. For example, in 2006 NAS
released "Rebuilding the Unity of Health and
the Environment in Rural America" and in
2004, "Valuing Ecosystem Services: Toward
Better Environmental Decision Making."
EPA's risk assessment forum has also con-
vened external reviews to evaluate programs
when appropriate. The Endocrine Disrupter
Chemical Research Program was evaluated in
this manner.
BOSC has initiated a cycle of review
for EPA's research programs and is evaluating
an average of three programs each year for
relevance, quality, and performance.
Between 2005 and 2006, BOSC reviewed
and made recommendations for improving
four research plans supporting healthy com-
munity and ecosystem goals: human health,
ecosystems, global climate change, and
endocrine disrupting chemicals.
EMERGING ISSUES AND EXTERNAL FACTORS
Rapidly changing technolo-
gies will have significant
implications for EPA's work to
protect and restore communities
and ecosystems. In the area of
nanotechnology, for example,
nanoscale materials—chemical
substances containing structures
on the scale of approximately 1
to 100 nanometers, or 1 to 100
billionths of a meter—will pres-
ent an emerging challenge for
our chemicals program. Due to
their small size, nanomaterials
may have different molecular
properties than do other
chemical substances and may present
unique risks. EPA is currently reviewing
pre-manufacture notices for several new
nanoscale chemical substances, and we
anticipate that we will soon be receiving
applications to register pesticides containing
nanoscale materials. (The first public inven-
tory of nanotechnology products that have
entered commercial use is available at
www.nanotechproject.org/inventories).
EPA's nascent nanotechnology research
program is focusing on decision support and
guiding safe commercial and environmental
applications. Between 2007 and 2011, our
nanotechnology research will address four
broad areas:
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Emerging Issues and External Factors
• Developing approaches to assess risk.
• Assessing risks to human health and
ecosystems, particularly for applica-
tions that disperse nanomaterials.
• Assessing—from a lifecycle
perspective—what impact products
containing nanomaterials might have
on human health and the environ-
ment and how, because of their likely
durability and longer shelf life, they
might conserve energy and other
resources, prevent pollution, and
advance sustainability.
• Identifying and developing research
technologies that use nanomaterials
to detect, monitor, and remediate
environmental releases of conven-
tional pollutants and nanoparticles.
We are also responding to nanotechnology
with a new environmental stewardship
program that will complement TSCA regula-
tory tools. In partnership with chemical
manufacturers, processors of nanoscale mate-
rials, and other stakeholders, we will gather
data to inform our risk assessment and risk
reduction activities. We will use this data and
information gained from strategic testing to
determine whether commercial activities
involving nanoscale materials present poten-
tial risks, and we will respond appropriately.
EPA may also be able to provide companies
with tools that will help them anticipate
environmental risks and invest in safer
products and production procedures.
EPA is also anticipating the use of DNA
micro-arrays in environmental chemical
testing. DNA micro-arrays are a type of tech-
nology that profiles the genomes of plant and
animal species and uses sequences like probes
to recognize substances. These technologies
have the potential to change and enhance
chemical testing in multiple environmental
areas. EPA researchers are making significant
progress in using DNA micro-arrays (gene
chips) and related developments, particularly
in computational toxicology.
Distributed sensor networks, another
emerging technology, have the potential to
enhance EPA's environmental monitoring. It
is possible to envision a network of physical,
chemical, and biological sensors that will
feed into a central environmental data man-
agement and analysis system, such as EPA's
GEOSS. Through distributed sensor net-
works, we could collect and transmit data
faster and more frequently, improve data
quality, enhance data integration, and
improve data sharing. Distributed sensor
networks could also provide better environ-
mental health information that allows us to
measure progress at multiple temporal and
spatial scales. This technology could support
our Report on the Environment, advance our
foresight capabilities, and provide data that
accurately portrays environmental conditions
on a real-time basis.
Renewable energy and fuel sources such
as biofuels could have many implications for
EPA. We will need to examine how produc-
ing new renewable and non-renewable forms
of energy and the infrastructure for distribut-
ing and storing them might affect the
environment. For example, the use of pesti-
cides and loss of habitat that attend
production of biofuels can potentially affect
human health and the environment. We will
also need to characterize the potential for
emissions generated from producing and
using biofuels.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
Global climate change, loss of habitat to sprawl, exploitation of natural
resources, invasive species, nonpoint source pollution, and the accumulation
and interaction of these conditions represent emerging ecological challenges.
Our ability to achieve our strategic objectives depends on a number of fac-
tors over which we have little or no influence. The success of partnerships,
international collaboration, and efforts at global harmonization; economic
influences (including increased trade and foreign investment); industrial
accidents; natural disasters; litigation; and new legislation all can affect our
progress in achieving our goals.
To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/ocfo/futures/perspectives.htm.
4.
5.
For information on EPA's National Land Cover Database, see U.S. EPA, Landscape Ecology Study Areas inter-
net site: www.epa.gov/nerlesdl/land-sci/. Las Vegas, NV: Office of Research and Development. See also U.S.
Department of the Interior, Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium internet site: www.mrlc.gov/.
Sioux Falls, SD: U.S. Geological Survey. Also see U.S. Department of the Interior, Earth Resources
Observation and Science (EROS), Global Land Cover Characterization internet site:
edcsnsl7.cr.usgs.gov/glcc/. U.S. Geological Survey (updated June 27, 2005). For information on EPA's
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program, see U.S. EPA, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
Program (EMAP) internet site: www.epa.gov/emap/. For information on EPA's Report on the Environment, see
U.S. EPA Report on the Environment internet site: www.epa.gov/indicators/index.htm. Washington, DC.
Measurement Mechanism: EPA risk management action tracking tools, including RAPIDS (not publicly
available) and HPVIS. See U.S. EPA, High Production Volume Information System (HPVIS) internet site:
http://epa.gov/hpvis/. Washington, DC: Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. Once HPV
challenge chemicals have been through the EPA multi-tier risk assessment process, any found to present unrea-
sonable risks under the Toxics Substance Control Act is tracked for action, such as Significant New Use Rules
(SNURs) that bind all manufacturers and processors to terms and conditions that prevent unreasonable risks,
other regulatory action, guidance, referral to other Agency statutes, etc.
Measurement Mechanism: Number of TSCA 8(e) Chemical Hazard Notifications associated with
Pre-manufacture notice (PMN)-reviewed chemicals verified to identify the occurrence of unreasonable risks.
Starting in FY 2005, EPA expanded its assessment of incoming TSCA 8(e) reports, required to be submitted
whenever companies leam of "substantial risks" to determine whether EPA properly identified those potential
hazards/risks in previously reviewed PMNs. The results of this new assessment process enables the program to
identify potential flaws in its PMN review protocols and act quickly to make associated improvements.
Target assumes annual 3.0% reductions for remaining years through 2011. Measurement Mechanism:
EPA's Risk Screening Environmental Indicators (RSEI) model. See U.S. EPA Risk Screening Environmental
Indicators (RSEI) internet site: www.epa.gov/opptintr/rsei/. Washington, DC: Office of Prevention, Pesticides
and Toxic Substances.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2005. Blood Lead Levels-United States, 1999-2002, MMWR:
54(2): 513-516. Available online at: www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/wk/mm5420.pdf.
6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1994. Update: Blood Lead Levels-United States, 1991-1994.
MMWR: 43(30): 545-548. Available online at: www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00032080.htm.
7. United Nations Environment Program and the Partnership for Clean Fuels and Vehicles maintain a global
database on fuel quality, which is updated periodically. See United Nations, Partnership for Clean Fuels and
Vehicles internet site: http://webapps01.un.org/dsd/partnerships/public/partnerships/178.html*top. New York,
NY: Division for Sustainable Development, Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Notes
8. Ibid.
9. The baseline for this strategic target is derived by totaling the vulnerability zones around individual RMP
facilities. In many instances, a facility's vulnerability zone overlaps with the vulnerability zones of other facili-
ties. Consequently, the baseline for this measure exceeds the spatial extent of vulnerable areas, but accurately
reflects cumulative progress in reducing potential sources of risk.
10. This strategic target is based on the levels of several key pesticides found in people as measured by the Centers
for Disease Control's bi-annual National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) (1999-2002).
Center for Disease Control had collected these data for sufficient time to establish a meaningful baseline. The
target provides an indicator of the body burden in the general population resulting from pesticide exposure.
See www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes.htm.
11. The term "risk events" is based on the assumption that every pesticide application has the potential to create
a pesticide incident with adverse health effects. The number of pesticide applications was derived by taking
the universe of occupationally exposed individuals and estimating the number of pesticide applications per
individual per year. Data sources: EPA's annual count of certified applicators; U.S. Department of Labor. March
2005. Findings from the National Agricultural Workers Survey (NAWS) 2001 - 2002. A Demographic and
Employment Profile of United States Farm Workers, Research Report No. 9., Washington, DC: Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Policy, Office of Programmatic Policy (available online at: www.doleta.gov/agworker/
naws.cfm) and; American Association of Poison Control Centers' Toxic Exposure Surveillance System:
www.aapcc.org/poisonl .htm.
12. American Association of Poison Control Centers' Toxic Exposure Surveillance System: www.aapcc.org/
poisonl.htm.
13. USGS National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program, as reported in Gilliom, R. ]., J. E. Barbash, et
al. 2006. The Quality of Our Nation's Waters: Pesticides in the Nation's Streams and Ground Water, 1992—2001.
Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey, Circular 1291: 172 p. Available online at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/
2005/1291/.
14. Annual Report of the Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4Project) (NRSP-4/IR-4):
January 1, 2005-December 31, 2005: http://ir4.rutgers.edu/Other/annreports.html.
15. EPA's estimate of annual termite structural damage avoided is derived from an estimated $2,500 average termite
damage per house, 3,620,000 units receiving termite treatment, and an estimate that 10 percent of housing
units would have received termite damage absent the treatment ($2,500 x 3,620,000 units = $9.05 billion
x 0.1 = $9.05 million/year termite structural damage avoided.)
16. Toxic Substances Control Act Section 5: Manufacturing and Processing Notices, Public Law 94-469,
October 11, 1976.
17. U.S. EPA, High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge Program internet site: www.epa.gov/chemrtk/.
Washington, DC: Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances (updated April 20, 2006).
18. U.S. EPA, High Production Volume Information System (HPVIS) internet site: www.epa.gov/hpvis/index.html.
Washington, DC: Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.
19. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Co-operation on the Investigation of Existing
Chemicals, Description of OECD Work on Investigation of High Production Volume Chemicals internet site:
www.oecd.org/document/21/0,2340,en_2649_34379_1939669_l_l_l_l,00.html. See also Global HPV Portal
and existing databases internet site: www.oecd.org/document/9/
0,2340,en_2649_34379_35211849_l_l_l_l,00.html. Also see United Nations Environmental Program,
Chemical Screening Information Data Set (SIDS) for High Volume Chemicals internet site:
www.chem.unep.ch/irptc/sids/OECDSIDS/sidspub.html.
20. Advanced tools developed under the NCP include QSAR - Quantitative Structure Activity Relationships.
There is no defined base data set required before PMN, and the TSCA does not require prior testing of new
chemicals. Consequently, less than half of the PMNs submitted include toxicological data. In these cases, EPA
scientists assess the chemical's structural similarity to chemicals for which data are available—called structure-
activity relationship (SAR)—to help predict toxicity. A useful discussion of SAR is found in an OECD mono-
graph, US EPA/EC joint Project on the Evaluation of (Quantitative) Structure Activity Relationships, Environment
Monograph No. 88, Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, Paris, 1994. Available online
at: www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems/pubs/ene4147.pdf.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
The Ecological Structure Activity Relationships (ECOSAR) is a personal computer software program used to
estimate the aquatic toxicity of chemicals. The program predicts the toxicity of industrial chemicals to aquatic
organisms such as fish, invertebrates, and algae using (Q)SARs. ECOSAR estimates a chemical's acute (short-
term) toxicity and, when available, chronic (long-term or delayed) toxicity. ECOSAR is available on the
internet at U.S. EPA, Pollution Prevention (P2) Framework, Hazard Models internet site: www.epa.gov/oppt/
p2framework/docs/hazard.htm#Sub2. Washington, DC: Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (updated
June 1, 2006).
21. U.S. EPA, Sustainable Futures. 67 Federal Register 76282. December 11, 2002, Washington, DC: Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Available online at: www.epa.gov/oppt/newchems/pubs/
sustainablefutures.htm.
22. For relevant studies, see citations in U.S. EPA. 2005. Draft Risk Assessment of the Potential Human Health Effects
Associated with Exposure to Perfluorooctanoic Acid and its Salts. Washington, DC, Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics, Risk Assessment Division. Available online at: www.epa.gov/opptintr/pfoa/pubs/pfoarisk.htm.
23. U.S. EPA, RMP Program Overview internet site: http://yosemite.epa.gov/oswer/ceppoweb.nsf/content/
RMPoverview.htm. Washington, DC: Office of Emergency Management.
24. U.S. EPA, EPCRA Overview internet site: http://yosemite.epa.gov/oswer/ceppoweb.nsf/content/
epcraOverview.htm. Washington, DC: Office of Emergency Management.
25. U.S. EPA, Acute Exposure Guideline Levels Program internet site: www.epa.gov/opptintr/aegl/.
Washington, DC: Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.
26. U.S. EPA, Pesticides internet site: www.epa.gov/pesticides/. Washington, DC: Office of Pesticide Programs
(updated June 1, 2006).
27. U.S. EPA, Pesticides: Topical & Chemical Fact Sheets, Pesticide Registration Program internet site:
www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/registration.htm (updated May 2, 2006).
28. U.S. EPA, Pesticide Tolerance Reassessment and Reregistration internet site: www.epa.gov/pesticides/
reregistration.
29. See U.S. EPA, Pesticides: Health and Safety, Reducing Pesticide Risk internet site:
www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/reducing.htm.
30. U.S. Department of Labor. March 2005. Findings from the National Agricultural Workers Survey (NAWS)
2001 - 2002. A Demographic and Employment Profile of United States Farm Workers, Research Report No. 9,
Washington, DC: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Office of Programmatic Policy. Available online
at: www.doleta.gov/agworker/naws.cfm.
31. The Endangered Species Act of 1973 sections 7(a)l and 7(a)2; Federal Agency Actions and Consultations, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)). Available at U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Act of 1973
internet site: www.fws.gov/endangered/esa.html#Lnk07.
32. Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, as amended. January 23, 2004. Section 3(a), Requirement
of Registration (7 U.S.C. 136a). Available online at: www.epa.gov/opp00001/regulating/fifra.pdf.
33. Gilliom, R.J., et al. 2006. The Quality of Our Nation's Waters: Pesticides in the Nation's Streams and Ground
Water, 1992-2001. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1291. 171p. Available online at:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2005/! 291/.
34. Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2)). Available at U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Act of 1973 internet site: www.fws.gov/endangered/
esa.html#Lnk07.
35. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2004.
Joint Counterpart Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Regulations, 50 CFR Part 402. Available
online at: http://endangered.fws.gov/consultations/pesticides/Final_Rule.pdf.
36. Community-specific baselines for criteria air pollutants, land consumption, and storm water run-off to EPA
assistance prior will be compared to environmental impacts from community actions affecting growth and
development, as predicted in computer-modeled alternative future development scenarios within each
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Notes
community and validated by actual environmental measurements and indicators. EPA uses a customized version
of Criterion's proprietary INDEX computer model for developing community development and growth scenar-
ios and assessing their impacts and impacts avoided. See Criterion Planners Inc. (2006). Smart Growth
INDEX. Portland, OR: www.crit.com.
37. The term "significant" is used in a manner analogous to its use under the National Environmental Policy Act,
involving considerations of both "context" and "intensity." See 40 CFR 1508.27. Under this definition, "...in
the [context] of a site-specific action, significance would usually depend upon the effects in the locale... Both
short- and long-term effects are relevant." With respect to intensity, issues such as the magnitude of the impact
(positive and negative) will be considered.
38. U.S. EPA, Environmental Data Registry, Assessment, Cleanup, Redevelopment, Exchange System internet at:
http://iaspub.epa.gov/ed/edr_proc_qry.navigate?P_LIST_OPTION_CD=CSALL&P_REG_AUTH_
IDENTIFIED= 1 &P _DATA_IDENTIFIED=97509&P_VERSION=1.
39. Census estimate of homes lacking access minus homes provided with access between 2000 and 2003.
40. 2000 Census estimate of homes lacking access to adequate wastewater sanitation minus homes provided with
access between 2000 and 2003.
41. These initial baselines were calculated from Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme data that includes
human health data points from indigenous maternal populations across the Arctic, including Alaska, Canada,
Norway, and the Russian Federation. Measurement Mechanism: Assessment of data from AMAP, an existing
international scientific working group, which advises governments of the eight Arctic countries on issues
related to pollution in the Arctic. AMAP data is presented in periodic scientifically-based assessments, which
are a result of cooperative efforts involving a large number of scientists and other stakeholders, who follow
agreed quality assurance and control protocols consistent with such practices common in the United States. For
summary of source data, see AMAP, 2002. Arctic Pollution 2002 (Persistent Organic Pollutants, Heavy Metals,
Radioactivity, Human Health, Changing Pathways). Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP),
Oslo, Norway, xii+112 pp. See also Persistent Toxic Substances, Food Security and Indigenous Peoples of the
Russian North. Final Report. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), Oslo, 2004. 192 p.
AMAP Report 2004:2. Documents are available on the AMAP internet site: www.amap.no/.
42. U.S. EPA, Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE) program internet site:
http://cfpub.epa.gov/care/.
43. Clinton, William ]. February 16, 1994. Federal actions to address environmental justice in minority populations
and loW'income populations. Executive Order 12898, 59 FR 7629. Available online at: www.archives.gov/
federal'register/executive'Orders/1994.html#12898.
44. Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (Public Law 107-118 (H.R. 2869), 115 stat.
2356). Available online at: www.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/sblrbra.htm#status.
45. Brownfields and Land Revitalization Technology Support Center internet site: www.brownfieldstsc.org/.
U.S. EPA's Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and
Argonne National Laboratory.
46. Triad Resource Center internet site: www.triadcentral.org/. Triad is an innovative approach to decision making
for hazardous waste site characterization and remediation. The Triad approach proactively exploits new charac-
terization and treatment tools. The Triad Resource Center provides the information hazardous waste site
managers and cleanup practitioners need to implement the Triad effectively. The U.S. EPA, U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, Argonne National Laboratory, State of New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection, and the Interstate Technology Regulatory Council support Triad.
47. SMARTe (Sustainable Management Approaches and Revitalization Tools) internet site:
www.smarte.org/smarte/home/index.xml. SMARTe is an open-source, web-based, decision support system for
developing and evaluating future reuse scenarios for potentially contaminated land. SMARTe contains
guidance and analysis tools for all aspects of the revitalization process including planning, environmental,
economic, and social concerns. The U.S. EPA's Office of Research and Development and Office of Brownfields
Cleanup and Redevelopment, the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, and the Interstate
Technology Regulatory Council support its development.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
48. U.S. EPA, U.S.-Mexico Border Program, Border 2012 Program internet site: www.epa.gov/usmexicoborder/.
49. Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. Signed by USA on May 23, 2001. Entered into force
on 17 May 2004. See www.pops.int/. See also www.epa.gov/oppfeadl/international/pops.htm.
50. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme internet site: www.amap.no/.
51. Arctic Council, www.arctiC'Council.org under "Activities" (ACAP/Obsolete Pesticides Project).
52. Arctic Council, www.arctiC'Council.org under "Activities" (ACAP/PCB Project).
53. U.S. DOI, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2006. Status and Trends of Wetlands in the Coterminous United
States 1998-2004, Washington, DC, 55 pp.
54. Data for the index components are tracked internally by U.S. EPA's Great Lakes National Program Office and
reported through the State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference (SOLEC) process. The document, State of the
Great Lakes 2005—A Technical Report, presents detailed indicator reports prepared by primary authors,
including listings of data sources.
55. U.S. EPA, Great Lakes Monitoring, Contaminants in Top Predator Fish internet site: www.epa.gov/glnpo/
glindicators/fishtoxics/topfishb.html.
56. Data are collected through the Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network (IADN). See U.S. EPA,
Great Lakes Monitoring, Atmospheric Deposition of Toxic Pollutants internet site: www.epa.gov/glnpo/
glindicators/air/airb.html.
57. U.S. EPA, Areas of Concern (AoCs) On-line, Great Lakes internet site: www.epa.gov/glnpo/aoc/index.html.
Chicago, Illinois: Great Lakes National Program Office.
58. U.S. EPA, Sediment Remediation, Great Lakes internet site: www.epa.gov/glnpo/glindicators/sediments/
remediateb.html. Chicago, Illinois: Great Lakes National Program Office.
59. Batiuk, R., et al. April 2003. Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Dissolved Oxygen, Water Clarity and
Chlorophyll a for Chesapeake Bay and Its Tidal Tributaries, Annapolis, Maryland: U.S. EPA, Region 3,
Chesapeake Bay Program Office: www.chesapeakebay.net/maycriteria.htm.
60. Ibid.
61. Koroncai, R., et al. December 2003, Setting and Allocating the Chesapeake Bay Basin Nutrient and Sediment
Loads: The Collaborative Process, Technical Tools, and Innovative Approaches. Annapolis, Maryland: U.S.
EPA, Region 3, Chesapeake Bay Program Office: www.chesapeake bay.net/caploads.htm.
62. Ibid.
63. Ibid.
64. U.S. EPA, Surf Your Watershed, 2002 Section 303 (d) List Fact Sheets for
Florida (http://oaspub.epa.gov/waters/state_rept.control?p_state=FL),
Alabama (http://oaspub.epa.gov/waters/state_rept.control?p_state=AL),
Mississippi (http://oaspub.epa.gov/waters/state_rept.control?p_state=MS,
Louisiana (http://oaspub.epa.gov/waters/state_rept.control?p_state=LA), and
Texas (http://oaspub.epa.gov/waters/state_rept.control?p_state=TX).
Also see U.S. EPA, Watershed Assessment, Tracking and Environmental Results (WATERS), WATERS Expert
Query Tool: http://iaspub.epa.gov/waters/ez_column.list?table_name=V_WO_IMPAIRMENTS_LIST. Also see
U.S. EPA, Region 4 Alabama's and Mississippi's 2002 303 (d) List Review Decision Document and Florida's
2003 303(d) List Decision; U.S. EPA, Region 6. Louisiana's 2002 Section 303(d) List of Water Quality Limited
Water Bodies and Review of Texas' 2002 Section 303(d) Water Body List. Sources for geospatial data are
303(d) mapping by Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Alabama Department of Environmental
Management, Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality, and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.
65. LaRoe, E.T., G.S. Farris, C.E. Puckett, P.D. Doran, and M.J. Mac, eds. 1995. Our Living Resources: A Report to
the Nation on the Distribution, Abundance, and Health of U.S. Plants, Animals, and Ecosystems. U.S. DOI,
National Biological Service, Washington, DC; 530 pp. Available online at:
http://biology.usgs.gov/s+t/index.htm.
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Notes
66. LUMCON News. July 28, 2006. LUMCON Researchers Report Current Hypoxic Zone at Over 6,600 Square
Miles: www.lumcon.edu/Information/news/default.asp?XMLFilename=200607281358
Shelfwide06PressRelease.xm:l; Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico: www.gulfhypoxia.net/shelfwide06/;
Chauvin, LA: Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium (LUMCON). Also see NOAA, July 24, 2006.
NOAA Forecasts Larger than Normal "Dead Zone" for Gulf this Summer. NOAA Magazine. Washington, DC:
NOAA Public, Constituent & Intergovernmental Affairs: www.noanews.noaa.gov/stories2006/s2669.htm.
67. Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection and New York State Department of Environmental
Protection. December 2000. A Total Maximum Daily Load Analysis to Achieve Water Quality Standards for
Dissolved Oxygen in Long Island Sound: www.longislandsoundstudy.net/pubs/reports/tmdl.pdf.
68. Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Long Island Sound Water Quality Monitoring:
http://dep.state.ct.us/wtr/lis/monitoring/lis_page.htm.
69. Long Island Sound Study, Sound Health 2006 Environmental Indicators: www.longislandsoundstudy.net/
indicators/index.htm on Water Quality/Water Quality Measures. Stamford, CT: EPA Long Island Sound Office.
70. Long Island Sound Study, Sound Health 2006 Environmental Indicators: www.longislandsoundstudy.net/
indicators/index.htm on Habitat Protection/River Miles Restored and Coastal Habitat Restored. Stamford, CT:
EPA Long Island Sound Office.
71. U. S. EPA, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, NOAA, Coral Reef Evaluation and
Monitoring Project (CREMP), Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Water Quality Protection Program:
http://ocean.floridamarine.org/fknms_wqpp/pages/cremp.html.
72. Florida International University, Southeast Environmental Research Center, Seagrass Ecosystems Research
Laboratory: www.fiu.edu/~seagrass.
73. Florida International University, Southeast Environmental Research Center, Water Quality Monitoring
Network: www.serc.fiu.edu/wqmnetwork.
74. U.S. EPA, Ecoregional Criteria, Nutrient Water Quality Criteria: www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/nutrient/
ecoregions/. Florida Department of Environmental Protection. July 2, 2006. Calculation of Annual and 5'Year
Geometric Mean Total Phosphorus Concentrations to Assess Achievement of the Phosphorus Criteria for the
Everglades Protection Area.
75. Puget Sound Assessment and Monitoring Program Update. Puget Sound Action Team and Washington
Department of Health, 2006: www.doh.wa/gov/ehp/sf/sfpubs.htm*GrowingAreasPubs.
76. U.S. EPA, Region 10, Superfund Site Inventory for Puget Sound, internal database.
77. Puget Sound Nearshore Restoration Site Inventory, Washington Interagency Committee for Outdoor
Recreation, project-tracking database, August 2006.
78. Baseline data will be based on Washington State input to the National Emissions Inventory Database.
79. The development of baselines for contaminants of concern found in water and fish tissue will include the
following sources: (1) Hood River Watershed, DEQ 2006, Mill Creek Watershed, DEQ 2006, Walla Walla
Watershed, DEQ 2006 (pending), Pudding River Watershed, DEQ 2006 (pending), and Clackamas River,
Watershed DEQ 2006 (pending). These reports which are found in hard copy will be put on the EPA Columbia
River website (as a part of the baseline information), which is currently under development. (2) Water
Cleanup Plans (TMDLs) by Watershed/Ecology Region, www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/tmdl/watershed/
index.html (updated April 2005); Yakima River Pesticide TMDL, Okanogan River DDT and PCB TMDL,
Wenatchee River, Mission Creek, and Lake Chelan PCB and Pesticide TMDL, Walla Walla Pesticide and PCB
TMDL, and Palouse River Pesticide and PCB TMDL. (3) U.S. EPA. 2002. Columbia River Basin Fish
Contaminant Survey: 1996-1998 (EPA, 910-R-02-006). Seattle, Washington: Region 10, Risk Evaluation Unit:
http://yosemite.epa.gov/R10/OEA.NSF/af6d4571f3e2bl698825650f0071180a/
c3a9164ed269353788256c09005d36b7?OpenDocument. (4) Fixed Station and Seasonal Monitoring of
Conventional and Toxic Contaminants on the Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership (LCREP) Internet
site: www.lcrep.org/eco_water_qual.htm*fixed. (5) Johnson, A. and D. Norton. March 2005. Concentrations of
303(d) Listed Pesticides, PCBs, and PAHs Measured with Passive Samplers Deployed in the Lower Columbia River,
Ecology Publication No. 05-03-006. Olympia WA., Washington State Department of Ecology:
www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/0503006.pdf.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
80. Dahl, T.E. 1990. Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780s to 1980s. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the
Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Available online at: www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/othrdata/
wetloss/wetloss.htm.
81. Dahl, T.E. 2006. Status and Trends of Wetlands in the Conterminous United States, 1998 to 2004. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 112 pp. Available at Fish and Wildlife
Service, National Wetlands Inventory internet site: www.fws.gov/nwi/.
82. Bush, George W April 22, 2004. Announcement of Wetlands Initiative on Earth Day. Wells National
Estuarine Research Reserve, Wells, Maine. Available at Council on Environmental Quality, Expanding and
Protecting America's Wetlands internet site: www.whitehouse.gov/ceq/clean-water.html*^.
83. Council on Environmental Quality. April 2006. Conserving America's Wetlands 2006: Two Years of Progress
Implementing the President's Goal. Available online at: www.whitehouse.gov/ceq/wetlands_200604.pdf.
84. Compensatory Mitigation Rulemaking web page: www.epa.gov/wetlandsmitigation.
85. U.S. EPA, Five Star Restoration Program internet site: www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/restore/5star/.
Washington, DC: Office Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds.
86. U.S. EPA, Regional Geographic Initiatives internet site: www.epa.gov/regional/rgi.htm. Washington, DC:
Office of Regional Operations.
87. U.S. EPA, Targeted Watershed Grants Program internet site: www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/initiative/.
Washington, DC: Office Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds.
88. U.S. EPA, Polluted Runoff (Nonpoint Source Pollution), Clean Water Act Section 319 internet site:
www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS/cwact.html. Washington, DC: Office Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds.
89. Beach, Dana. 2002. Coastal Sprawl: The Effects of Urban Design on Aquatic Ecosystems in the United States.
Arlington, VA: Pew Oceans Commission. Available online at: www.pewtrusts.org/ideas/
ideas_item.cfm?content_item_id=1023&content_type_id=8.
90. Bush, George W. May 18, 2004: Executive Order: Establishment of Great Lakes Interagency Task Force and
Promotion of a Regional Collaboration of National Significance for the Great Lakes. Executive Order 13340.
Available at: www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/05/20040518-3.html
91. U.S. EPA, Great Lakes, Regional Collaboration: Interagency Task Force internet sites:
www.epa.gov/grtlakes/collaboration/taskforce/index.html.
92. U.S. EPA, Great Lakes Regional Collaboration: Making the Great Lakes Greater internet site:
www.epa.gov/grtlakes/collaboration/index.html. See also: Bush, George W. May 18, 2004. Executive Order:
Establishment of Great Lakes Interagency Task Force and promotion of a regional collaboration of national
significance for the Great Lakes. Washington, DC. Available online at: www.epa.gov/grtlakes/collaboration/
taskforce/eo.html.
93. Great Lakes Regional Collaboration internet site: www.glrc.us/. See also Great Lakes Regional Collaboration
Strategy to Restore and Protect the Great Lakes. December 2005. Chicago, IL: Great Lakes Regional
Collaboration. Available online at: www.glrc.us/strategy.html.
94. U.S. EPA, Great Lakes Pollution Prevention and Toxics Reduction, Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy
internet site: www.epa.gov/glnpo/bns/index.html.
95. U.S. EPA, Chesapeake Bay Program. June 2000. Chesapeake 2000 Agreement. Annapolis, Maryland. Available
online at: http://chesapeakebay.net/pubs/chesapeake2000agreement.pdf.
96. Koroncai, R., et al. December 2003. Setting and Allocating the Chesapeake Bay Basin Nutrient and Sediment Loads:
The Collaborative Process, Technical Tools, and Innovative Approaches. Annapolis, Maryland: U.S. EPA, Region 3,
Chesapeake Bay Program Office: www.chesapeakebay.net/caploads.htm.
97. U.S. EPA, Gulf of Mexico Program internet site: www.epa.gov/gmpo.
98. The Gulf of Mexico Alliance internet site: www.dep.state.fl.us/gulf/. Tallahassee, Florida: Florida Department of
Environmental Protection.
-------
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems—Notes
99. Federal Workgroup, the U.S. Ocean Action Plan's Gulf of Mexico Regional Partnership internet site:
www2.nos.noaa.gov/gomex.
100. Gulf of Mexico Alliance. 2006. Governors' Action Plan for Healthy and Resilient Coasts: March
2006-March 2009. Available online at: www.dep.state.fl.us/gulf/files/files/GulfActionPlan_Final.pdf.
101. Long Island Sound Study (LISS) internet site: www.longislandsoundstudy.net. Also see Comprehensive
Conservation and Management Plan for Long Island Sound. March 1994: www.longislandsoundstudy.net/
mgmtplan.htm. Stamford, CT: EPA Long Island Sound Office.
102. Moore, R.E., M.S. Overton, R.J. Norwood, and D. DeRose. 2000. Nitrogen Credit Trading for Long Island Sound
Watershed. Water Environment Research Foundation Project RFP'97'IRM'5B. Alexandria, VA:
Water Environment Research Foundation.
103. Long Island Sound Study, Long Island Sound 2003 Agreement internet site:
www.longislandsoundstudy.net/ccmp/liss_agreement_03.htm. Stamford, CT: EPA Long Island Sound Office.
104. U.S. EPA, Region 4: South Florida Geographic Initiative internet site: www.epa.gov/region4/
water/southflorida/.
105. U.S. EPA. 2002. Columbia River Basin Fish Contaminant Survey: 1996-1998 (EPA, 910-R-02-006). Seattle,
Washington, U.S. EPA Region 10, Risk Evaluation Unit: http://yosemite.epa.gov/R10/OEA.NSF/
af6d4571f3e2bl698825650f0071180a/c3a9164ed269353788256c09005d36b7?OpenDocument. Also see Fixed
Station and Seasonal Monitoring of Conventional and Toxic Contaminants on the Lower Columbia River
Estuary Partnership (LCREP) internet site: www.lcrep.org/eco_water_qual.htm*fixed. Also see Johnson, A. and
D. Norton. March 2005. Concentrations of 303(d) Listed Pesticides, PCBs, and PAHs Measured with Passive
Samplers Deployed in the Lower Columbia River, Ecology Publication No. 05-03-006. Olympia WA: Washington
State Department of Ecology, www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/0503006.pdf.
106. U.S. EPA Report on the Environment internet site: www.epa.gov/indicators/index.htm.
107. On November 5, 2005, EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson established eight national environmental jus-
tice priorities in a memorandum, "Reaffirming the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Commitment to
Environmental Justice." The memorandum is available online at www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/
policies/ej/admin-ej-commit-letter-110305.pdf . The national environmental justice priorities include: (1)
Reduce asthma attacks; (2) Fish and shellfish safe to eat; (3) Reduce exposure to air toxics; (4) Water safe to
drink; (5) Reduced incidence of elevated blood lead levels; (6) Collaborative problem-solving; (7) Ensure com-
pliance; and (8) Revitalization of brownfields and contaminated sites.
-------
^p*^*'**.
>p- --, X.
X
-------
Environmental
Stewardshi
Protect human health and the environment through ensuring
compliance with environmental requirements by enforcing
environmental statutes, preventing pollution, and promoting
environmental stewardship. Encourage innovation and provide
incentives for governments, businesses, and the public that promote
environmental stewardship and long-term sustainable outcomes.
-------
Under Goal 5 EPA will accelerate the pace of environmental
protection by taking compliance and enforcement actions that
produce environmental results, by preventing pollution at the source
and advancing other forms of environmental stewardship, and by embracing
the tools of innovation and collaboration,
Effective compliance assistance and strong, consistent enforcement are
critical to achieving the human health and environmental benefits expected
from our environmental laws. By offering compliance assistance to those who
want to comply with environmental regulations and standing ready with a
strong enforcement program, we will ensure that the public receives the
benefits promised by our environmental laws. We will achieve significant
environmental results by focusing our efforts on priority problem areas
identified through consultation with states and tribes. We will protect the
public by criminally prosecuting willful, intentional, and serious violations of
the federal environmental laws,
At the same time, EPA will promote the principles of responsible
stewardship, sustainability, and accountability to achieve all of its strategic
T _ goals. Collaborating closely with our federal, state, and tribal partners,
^^A j& M the Agency will focus efforts on innovations that assist businesses and
I fm /A communities in improving their environmental performance. To achieve
pollution prevention goals, we will work with industrial, governmental, and
non-governmental partners to increase the effectiveness of voluntary and
self-directed approaches that minimize or eliminate the generation of pollution. In addition, EPA will
continue to conduct research on pollution prevention, new and developing technologies, social and
economic issues, and decision-making,
0 V
Granta Nakayama
Assistant Administrator
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance
Jim Gulliford
Assistant Administrator
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxic Substances
128
-------
GOAL 5:
lance
rEnvironmental Stewardship
OBJECTIVES
Objective 5.1: Achieve
Environmental Protectk
Through Improved
compliance
EPA is working to ensure that government, business,
and the public comply with federal laws and regulations
designed to protect the environment
and human health. We employ
several strategies to achieve this goal.
Our compliance assurance program
provides compliance assistance and
incentives, monitors compliance
efforts and trends, and enforces
against violators. Our pollution
prevention programs and other
innovative partnerships promote self-
directed action to minimize or
eliminate pollution before it is
generated. We also work with other
nations, including key international
trading partners, as they develop and
enforce their own environmental
protection programs. Increasing
environmental compliance in other
countries will lead to lower levels of
pollution that can cross borders and
affect the United States.
Objective 5.2: Improve
Environmental Performanc
Through Pollution Prevent
stewards
requirements. Stewards of the environment recycle
wastes to the greatest extent possible, minimize or
eliminate pollution at its source,
conserve natural resources, and use
energy efficiently to prevent harm to
the environment or human health.
We use science and research to
inform Agency policy decisions and
guide our efforts to promote environ-
mental stewardship. To meet our
domestic environmental challenges,
we continue to cooperate and
coordinate with our international
partners to promote environmental
stewardship globally.
Objective 5.3: Improw
Human Health and th
Environment in Indian
Objective 5.4: Enhanc
Society's Capacity for
and Kesean
We use the term "environ-
mental stewardship" to describe the
sense of responsibility and ownership that goes with not
only meeting, but exceeding, existing regulatory
In cooperation with our partners,
we use four tools to maximize compli-
ance: provide assistance to promote
understanding of environmental
regulations; offer incentives that
encourage facilities voluntarily to
identify, disclose, and correct viola-
tions; monitor compliance through
inspections, evaluations, and
investigations; and conduct civil and
criminal enforcement actions to correct violations and
deter future non-compliance.
129
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
Currently, EPA is in the process of
examining and revising Objective 5.1, the
associated sub-objectives, and the perform-
ance measures used to track progress in
improving compliance. The current objec-
tive, sub-objectives, and measures focus on
the use of the four tools described above. The
revised version will link outcomes achieved in
reducing or eliminating pollution, key
environmental risks, and non-compliance
patterns to program implementation of the
national priority strategy for enforcement.
As an example, a measure and target may
be developed related to compliance and
enforcement activities at combined sewer
overflows that are located within 1 mile
upstream of surf ace drinking water uptakes.
As these new measures are developed, the
older measures contained within this Plan
will be amended and replaced.
OBJECTIVE 5.1: ACHIEVE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
THROUGH IMPROVED COMPLIANCE
BY 2011, MAXIMIZE COMPLIANCE TO PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH AND THE
ENVIRONMENT THROUGH ENFORCEMENT AND OTHER COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE
ACTIVITIES BY ACHIEVING A 5 PERCENT INCREASE IN THE POUNDS OF POLLUTANTS
REDUCED, TREATED, OR ELIMINATED BY REGULATED ENTITIES, INCLUDING THOSE IN
INDIAN COUNTRY/ (BASELINE: 3-YEAR ROLLING AVERAGE FYs 2003-2005:
900,000,000 POUNDS.)
Sub-objective
5.1.1: Compliance
Assistance. By 2011,
prevent noncompli-
ance or reduce
environmental risks,
with an emphasis on
achieving results in
all areas including
those with potential
environmental justice
concerns, through
EPA compliance assis-
tance by maintaining
or improving on the
following percentages
for direct assistance provided to regulated
entities, including those in Indian country:
50 percent of the regulated entities receiving
direct assistance improve environmental
management practices;3 and 12 percent of the
regulated entities receiving direct assistance
reduce, treat, or eliminate pollution.
(Baselines are determined each year based on
prior year results.)
Sub-objective 5.1.2: Compliance Incentives.
By 2011, identify and correct noncompliance
and reduce environmental risks, with an
emphasis on achieving results in all areas
including those with potential environmental
justice concerns. Use of compliance incen-
tives will result in a 5 percentage point
increase in the number of facilities that use
EPA incentive policies to conduct environ-
mental audits or other actions that reduce,
treat, or eliminate pollution or improve
environmental management practices at
their facilities, including those in Indian
country. (Baseline: 3-year rolling average
FYs 2003-2005: 940 facilities.)
Sub-objective 5.1.3: Monitoring and
Enforcement. By 2011, identify, correct,
and deter noncompliance and reduce
environmental risks, with an emphasis on
achieving results in all areas including
those with potential environmental justice
concerns, through monitoring and enforce-
ment of regulated entities' compliance,
-------
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship—Objective 5.1: Achieve Environmental Protection Through Improved Compliance
including those in Indian country, by
achieving: a 5 percent increase in the num-
ber of facilities taking complying actions4
during EPA inspections and evaluations
after deficiencies have been identified
(baseline to be determined based on
FY 2006 results); a 5 percentage point
increase in the percent of enforcement
actions requiring that pollutants be
reduced, treated, or eliminated (FY 2005
baseline: 28.8 percent); and a 5 percentage
point increase in the percent of enforce-
ment actions requiring improvement of
environmental management practices.
(FY 2005 baseline: 72.5 percent.)
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
ACHIEVING COMPLIANCE
Environmental laws can achieve their
purposes only when facilities and companies
comply with requirements. Facilities and
companies that do not comply can gain an
unfair economic advantage over those that
do invest the resources necessary to meet
their environmental obligations. EPA works
with state, tribal, and local agencies to secure
and maintain compliance with the nation's
environmental laws and regulations.
Over the next 5 years, we will continue
working with state, tribal, and local environ-
mental compliance assurance programs to:
• Ensure a consistent level of effort
among state and tribal enforcement
and compliance assurance programs.
• Identify national priorities for
enforcement and compliance.
• Better integrate state, tribal, regional,
and national strategic planning
efforts.
• Share information about patterns of
noncompliance or emerging risks
which need to be addressed.
• Explore opportunities for developing
common performance measures for
state and tribal enforcement and
compliance assurance programs.
• Continue to ensure compliance
in Indian country by improving
data collection and reporting and
by building tribal capacity for manag-
ing compliance and enforcement
programs.
We will also work with some of our
state and tribal partners, and with the U.S.
Departments of State, Justice, the Interior,
and other federal agencies, to encourage
other countries' efforts to develop and ensure
compliance with their own domestic
environmental programs.
COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE
EPA will continue to assist the regulated
community in complying with environmental
laws and regulations by providing training,
workshops, on-site visits, and telephone con-
tacts. Our 14 virtual Compliance Assistance
Centers (www.epa.gov/compliance/
assistance/centers/index.html) provide assis-
tance directly to regulated entities and offer
access to resources such as pollution preven-
tion information. We will also provide
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
assistance to regulated entities indirectly by
tailoring compliance assistance tools and
making them readily available on our
websites, as free publications, and through
trade associations and other groups. Our
National Environmental Compliance
Assistance Clearinghouse provides federal,
state, tribal, and local governments; acade-
mia; trade associations; and other
organizations a forum for sharing information
on best practices, new compliance assistance
materials, and performance measurement.
As part of our compliance assistance, we
also encourage environmental stewardship
by establishing partnership programs designed
to minimize or eliminate the generation
of pollution.
Through the Environmental Assistance
Network, we will continue to coordinate
EPA's efforts to assist specific industry sectors,
such as health care or construction, in
improving their environmental performance.
The Network brings EPA programs together
around specific sectors to identify opportuni-
ties for common metrics and measures and to
develop coordinated approaches for providing
assistance, preventing pollution, and
promoting environmental stewardship.
Estimated Pollutant Reduction Commitments
Obtained Through Formal Case Conclusions
COMPLIANCE INCENTIVES
Offering the regulated community incen-
tives to address problems proactively helps
foster a sense of environmental stewardship.
EPA provides a number of incentives to
encourage public and private entities to
assess their compliance with environmental
requirements, voluntarily disclose concerns,
correct them, and prevent recurring prob-
lems. The Small Business Compliance Policy,
for example, allows businesses with fewer
than 100 employees reduced penalties for
discovering, disclosing, and correcting federal
violations. We will continue to make the
Audit Policy (Self-Policing Policy) and com-
pliance incentives such as reduced penalties
for violations and extended time for correc-
tion available to the regulated community.
We will also encourage owners of multiple
facilities to enter into corporate-wide
auditing agreements, which offer them the
opportunity to review their operations more
comprehensively while providing certainty
about their environmental liability.
Corporate-wide auditing agreements,
particularly those following mergers
and acquisitions, offer the potential for
significant environmental benefits
because environmental compliance issues
are addressed simultaneously across
the corporation.
COMPLIANCE MONITORING AND
ENFORCEMENT
Federal environmental regulations
establish a consistent baseline for compliance
levels nationwide. States and tribes that have
been delegated responsibility for specific
programs may set more stringent standards
and enforce against them.
At the national level, EPA will use
strategic targeting to conduct monitoring and
enforcement activities—inspections, evalua-
tions, civil and criminal investigations,
-------
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship—Objective 5.2: Improve Environmental Performance
administrative actions, and civil and criminal
judicial enforcement. By identifying the most
egregious violators and returning them to
compliance as quickly as possible, we can
address the most significant risks to human
health and the environment and relieve
disproportionate burdens on certain popula-
tions. EPA will continue to base its national
enforcement and compliance assurance
program on two components: (1) a limited
number of national priorities that focus on
significant environmental risks and patterns
of noncompliance
and (2) core program
activities that imple-
ment all environmental
laws and requirements.
We will continue to
collaborate with states
and tribes in analyzing
compliance data and
trends to identify
priorities for attention.
OBJECTIVE 5.2: IMPROVE ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE
THROUGH POLLUTION PREVENTION AND OTHER
STEWARDSHIP PRACTICES
BY 2011, ENHANCE PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND
INCREASE CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES BY PROMOTING POLLUTION
PREVENTION AND THE ADOPTION OF OTHER STEWARDSHIP PRACTICES BY
COMPANIES, COMMUNITIES, GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS, AND INDIVIDUALS.
Sub-objective 5.2.1: Prevent Pollution and
Promote Environmental Stewardship. By
2011, reduce pollution, conserve natural
resources, and improve other environmental
stewardship practices while reducing costs
through implementation of EPA's pollution
prevention programs.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, reduce 4.5 billion pounds of
hazardous materials cumulatively
compared to the 2000 baseline of
44 million pounds reduced.
• By 2011, reduce, conserve, or offset
31.5 trillion British Thermal Units
(BTUs) cumulatively compared to
the 2002 baseline of 0 BTUs reduced,
conserved, or offset.
• By 2011, reduce water use by
19 billion gallons cumulatively
compared to the 2000 baseline of
220 million gallons reduced.
• By 2011, save $791.9 million through
pollution prevention improvements
in business, institutional, and govern-
mental costs cumulatively compared
to the 2002 baseline of $0.0 saved.
• By 2011, reduce 4 million pounds of
priority chemicals from waste streams
as measured by National Partnership
for Environmental Priorities (NPEP)
contributions, Supplemental
Environmental Projects (SEPs), and
other tools used by EPA to achieve
priority chemical reductions.
Sub-objective 5.2.2: Promote Improved
Environmental Performance Through
Business and Community Innovation.
Through 2011, improve environmental per-
formance with sustainable outcomes through
sector-based approaches, performance-based
programs, and assistance to small business.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
Strategic Targets
• By FY 2011, the reported results of
Performance Track member facilities
collectively will show the following
normalized annual reductions: 5.1
billion gallons in water use; 13,000
tons of hazardous materials use;
230,000 megatons of carbon dioxide
equivalent (MTCO2E) of greenhouse
gases; 300 tons of toxic discharges to
water; and 5,500 tons of combined
NOX, SOX, VOC, and PM emissions.
(Performance Track member facilities
make commitments to, and report
yearly progress on, performance
improvements in up to four environ-
mental areas. In FY 2005,
Performance Track members
achieved normalized annual
reductions of 3.4 billion gallons in
water use; 8,794 tons of hazardous
materials use; 151,129 MTCO2E
of greenhouse gases; 186 tons of toxic
discharges to water; and 3,533 tons
of combined NOX, SOX, VOC,
and PM emissions.)
• By 2011, the participating manufac-
turing and service sectors in the
Sector Strategies Program will
achieve an aggregate 10 percent
reduction in environmental releases
to air, water, and land, working from
a 2004 baseline and normalized to
reflect economic growth. (Baseline
and normalization factors to be
developed by December 2006.)
Sub-Objective 5.2.3: Promote Environmental
Policy Innovation. Through 2011, achieve
measurably improved environmental results,
promote stewardship behavior, and advance
sustainable outcomes by testing, evaluating,
and applying alternative approaches to envi-
ronmental protection in states, companies,
and communities. This work also will seek to
improve the organizational cost effectiveness
and efficiency for regulatory agencies as well
as regulated entities. Specifically, by 2011,
innovation projects under the State
Innovation Grant Program and other piloting
mechanisms will achieve, on average, an 8
percent or greater improvement in environ-
mental results (such as reductions in air or
water discharges, improvements in ambient
air or water air quality, or improvements in
compliance rates), or a 5 percent or greater
improvement in cost effectiveness and
efficiency. (Each project's achievement will
be measured by the goals established in the
grantee's proposal. Baselines for ambient
conditions or pollutant discharges or costs of
compliance will be developed at the begin-
ning of each project, and improvements for
each project will be measured after full
implementation of the innovative practice.)
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
IMPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL
PERFORMANCE
EPA is committed to developing and
promoting innovative strategies that achieve
better environmental results, reduce costs,
and promote environmental stewardship.
In collaboration with states and tribes, we
will continue to focus on innovations that
will help small businesses and communities
improve both their environmental and
economic performance.
The Pollution Prevention Act of 1990
encourages prevention and source reduction
as preferred methods for keeping pollutants
from release to the environment. EPA will
-------
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship—Objective 5.2: Improve Environmental Performance
promote partnerships to achieve our pollu-
tion prevention goals and encourage
responsible stewardship, sustainability, and
accountability. We will work with industry to
design manufacturing processes and products
that prevent pollution and will team with
states, tribes, and governments at all levels to
find innovative, cost-effective approaches for
preventing pollution. A key element of our
strategy is the Pollution Prevention State
Grant Program. Annually, EPA provides
approximately $5 million to states and tribes
to support their efforts to provide industry
with technical assistance, information
sharing, and outreach.
As mandated by Executive Order 13101,
we will work with federal agencies to ensure
that their purchasing decisions minimize
damage to the environment. Through
our Environmentally Preferable Purchasing
Program (www.epa.gov/epp), and such initia-
tives as the Federal Electronics Challenge
(www.federalelectronicschallenge.net) and
the Electronic Products Environmental
Assessment Tool (www.epeat.net/ and
http://epa.gov/oppt/epp/pubs/products/
epeat.htp), we will continue to promote
purchasing, operating, and disposing of
electronic products in ways that protect the
environment. In addition, we will work with
our partners and key stakeholders to enhance
international awareness and use of pollution
prevention measures and environmental
stewardship approaches, in particular
by focusing on key trading partner countries
that are major emitters of critical
transboundary pollutants.
Our Innovations Strategy relies on
continued outreach to states, tribes, and
businesses to help identify innovative
approaches that merit testing, evaluation,
and implementation. To provide leadership
on the cutting edge of environmental policy,
EPA works continually to identify, test, and
implement innovative strategies that are
effective and efficient. Some innovations
relate to policies and programs, such as
permitting or the regulation of small sources.
Other innovations change the way EPA does
business. For example, we will utilize our staff
expertise in working with state, community,
and business leaders to strengthen partner-
ships that encourage collaboration and
meaningful public involvement. To bring
innovations to full-scale implementation, we
will initiate regulatory change, such as
more flexible permitting approaches, and
encourage states to adopt new strategies.
IMPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL
PERFORMANCE
EPA will advance environmental
protection through innovative and
collaborative approaches with business and
government that produce measurable
environmental results. For example, our
National Environmental Performance Track
Program is a public-private partnership that
encourages continuous environmental
improvement through the use of environ-
mental management systems, local
community involvement, and measurable
environmental results. Performance Track
motivates high-performing facilities to meas-
urably reduce their environmental footprint
beyond legal requirements and changes the
way government regulates these facilities.
Through the Performance Track Program, we
will establish new relationships with business
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
based on recognition, mentoring, sharing
knowledge, incentives (including placing a
lower priority on routine inspections), and a
sustained pattern of superior performance.
Under our Sectors Strategy Program,
we will continue to work with sectors of
the U.S. economy that make a significant
impact on the environment to improve their
environmental performance. Although over-
all the program is intended to promote
environmental stewardship while minimizing
regulatory burden, individual sector projects
address our specific air, water, land, and
ecosystem objectives as well. The Sectors
Strategy Program supports the Administrator's
goal to "accelerate the pace of environmental
protection" by addressing the "driver and
barrier" factors in each sector that affect envi-
ronmental management decisions. We will
emphasize results and accountability by track-
ing sector-wide trends in pollutant emissions
and resource conservation in the Sector
Strategies Performance Report, available at
www.epa.gov/sectors/performance.html.
OZONE
FRIENDLY
CONTAINS NO
CHLOROFLUORO
CARBON
PROPELLANT
ALLEGED TO
DAMAGE THE
OZONELAYER
EPA will continue to promote widespread
use of environmental management systems
(EMSs) domestically and internationally.
EMSs provide a structured system and
approach for managing environmental
responsibilities (including areas not subject
to regulation, such as product design,
resource conservation, energy efficiency,
and other sustainable practices) to improve
overall environmental performance. Through
a variety of partnership programs and our
EMS website, we will provide information
and technical assistance for organizations
implementing EMSs. We will also fund
research on the effectiveness of EMSs in
the private and public sectors.
We also remain committed to identifying
and testing new approaches to improving
environmental performance by partnering
with states, tribes, and industry through the
State Innovation Grant Program. We will use
this grant program to fund projects that pro-
mote innovative approaches to permitting or
improve corporate environmental perform-
ance. One example of an innovative program
receiving a State Innovation Grant is the
Environmental Results Program, an approach
first developed by the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts to regulate small sources such
as drycleaners and printers more cost effec-
tively. We will measure and track results for
the State Innovation Grant program by
requiring grantees to include performance
measures in project planning, to report
regularly on implementation of their projects,
and to file a final report on results achieved.
We plan to conduct an evaluation of the
State Innovation Grant Program by 2011.
COST SAVING TECHNOLOGIES
THAT PREVENT POLLUTION
We will continue to conduct EPA pro-
grams to prevent pollution while realizing
economic savings:
• Our Green Chemistry Program5
supports research and fosters innova-
tive chemical technologies to
prevent pollution in a scientifically
sound, cost-effective manner.
-------
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship—Objective 5.2: Improve Environmental Performance
• The Green Suppliers Network works
with the U.S. Department of
Commerce's Manufacturing
Extension Program and state techni-
cal assistance programs to provide
manufacturing suppliers with infor-
mation on cost saving opportunities
and technologies to eliminate waste
and increase energy efficiency.
• The Presidential Green Chemistry
Challenge Award Program recognizes
superior achievement in the design
of chemical products and encourages
chemical designers to prevent
pollution, conserve water, and
reduce energy use in achieving
measurable results.
• Our Design for the Environment6
Industry Partnership Program offers
technology assessments and outreach
to encourage businesses to adopt
cleaner, cheaper, and smarter
pollution prevention practices.
We will continue to work with industry
sectors to measure results in reducing risks to
human health and the environment, improve
performance, and save costs associated with
existing and alternative pollution prevention
technologies or processes.
WASTE MINIMIZATION
To reduce priority chemicals in wastes
going to landfills, EPA focuses on key waste
streams and waste generators. For example,
through the NPEP, a part of the Agency's
Resource Conservation Challenge, we will
encourage state and local governments,
manufacturers, and other nongovernmental
organizations to form partnerships to reduce
the generation of waste containing any of the
31 priority chemicals. Companies that
become NPEP partners are publicly
recognized for their contribution to the
national waste reduction goal.
Green Chemistry Challenge
Cumulative Results
^ Gallons of Water Saved (millions)
^ Pounds of Hazardous Materials Reduced (millions)
(Water and Materials have no correlation to each other.)
Year
We will continue to protect the environ-
ment and children's health through
innovative and collaborative approaches that
produce measurable environmental results.
Our Schools Chemical Cleanout Campaign
will help to decrease the number of injuries
and school days lost due to poor chemical
management and chemical spills. Working
with other federal agencies, states, tribes, and
local governments, we will provide technical
assistance and grant funding to clean out
chemicals and prevent future chemical
management problems.
PREVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
THROUGH NEPA REVIEW
Working with the White House Council
on Environmental Quality, EPA will prevent
adverse environmental impacts associated
with large federal projects subject to National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review7.
Section 309 of the Clean Air Act requires
EPA to review and make public its comments
on the environmental impacts of other federal
agencies. We will also assist other federal
agencies developing environmental impact
statements, help them develop projects to
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
avoid adverse environmental impacts,
support streamlined environmental
review processes, and participate in
rotational assignment programs and
interagency work groups.
POLLUTION PREVENTION WORK
WITH TRIBAL PARTNERS
The environmental and public
health issues facing tribes are a priority
for EPA, and one focus of our effort to
ensure environmental justice. We will
expand green technologies on tribal
lands,8 especially for buildings constructed
decades ago. We are working with the
U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development to provide tribes
with information and training on
"green buildings," to incorporate green
building guidance in tribal housing
grants, and to implement advisory
group recommendations.
OBJECTIVE 5.3: IMPROVE HUMAN HEALTH AND THE
ENVIRONMENT IN INDIAN COUNTRY
PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT ON TRIBAL LANDS BY ASSISTING
FEDERALLY-RECOGNIZED TRIBES TO BUILD ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CAPACITY,
ASSESS ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AND MEASURE RESULTS, AND IMPLEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS IN INDIAN COUNTRY.
Strategic Targets
• By 2011, increase the percent
of tribes implementing federal
environmental programs in
Indian country to 9 percent.
(FY 2005 baseline: 5 percent
of 572 tribes.)
• By 2011, increase the percent
of tribes conducting EPA-
approved environmental
monitoring and assessment
activities in Indian country to
26 percent. (FY 2005 baseline:
20 percent of 572 tribes.)
• By 2011, increase the percent
of tribes with an environmental
program to 67 percent.9
(FY 2005 baseline: 54 percent
of 572 tribes.)
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
IMPROVING HEALTH AND THE
ENVIRONMENT IN INDIAN COUNTRY
Under federal environmental
statutes, EPA is responsible for protect-
ing human health and the environment
in Indian country. Our American Indian
Environmental Office (AIEO) leads
an Agency-wide effort to work with
572 federally-recognized tribes, as well
as intertribal consortia,10 located in 9 of
EPA's 10 regions. The land in Indian
country totals more than 70 million
acres, and reservations range from less
than 10 to more than 14 million acres.
EPA's strategy for achieving our
objectives in Indian country has three
major components. First, we will
continue to distribute Indian General
Assistance Program (GAP) capacity-
building grants. GAP grants help tribes
-------
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship—Objective 5.3: Improve Human Health and the Environment in Indian Country
cover the cost of planning, developing, and
establishing environmental protection
programs. Our goal is help every federally-
recognized tribe establish an environmental
presence. To demonstrate the results
achieved by these funds more effectively,
we are developing more and better environ-
mental and public health measures to track
tribal environmental progress.
Second, we will develop the information
technology infrastructure needed to assess
environmental conditions in Indian country
and measure the results achieved by the
environmental programs operating on those
and related lands. The Tribal Program
Enterprise Architecture (TPEA) comple-
ments GAP by organizing environmental
data on a tribal basis and providing a picture
of current environmental conditions at the
local level. As tribes assume management of
their own environmental programs (through
the "treatment in a manner similar to a state"
process available under several environmental
statutes or by developing a tribal program
under tribal law), they will be able to use
TPEA data to help identify program
priorities. We will continue to coordinate
EPA's efforts with those of other federal
agencies (including the U.S. Department of
the Interior's Geological Survey and Bureau
of Reclamation and the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services' Indian
Health Service) to create a comprehensive,
integrated Tribal Enterprise Architecture.
TPEA will supplement our national systems
by allowing tribes and EPA regional offices to
supply information on local environmental
conditions. As data gaps are identified, EPA
will work with tribes to obtain the data needed
to address high risks in Indian country.
Third, we will guide and closely track the
implementation of our programs directly on
Indian lands.11 In reaching out to tribes,
EPA's water, air, land, pollution
prevention, and enforcement and compliance
programs have developed specific tribal
strategies. As part of our strategic planning,
we will continue to consult and collaborate
with tribes. The Tribal Caucus, which has
provided input to EPA on tribal issues for
several years, will continue to serve as our
focal point and help develop and strengthen
EPA-tribal partnerships. We will also engage
other EPA-sponsored tribal groups, such as
the Tribal Committee of the Forum on State
and Tribal Toxics Action, the Tribal
Pesticides Program Council, the Tribal
Science Council, the National Tribal Air
Association, and the Tribal Water Council.
Beyond improving environmental condi-
tions in Indian country, our engagement with
the tribes will support their work as the first
stewards of our nation's environment. All of
EPA's environmental programs will benefit by
integrating tribal stewardship perspectives.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
OBJECTIVE 5.4: ENHANCE SOCIETY'S CAPACITY FOR
SUSTAINABILITY THROUGH SCIENCE AND RESEARCH
CONDUCT LEADING-EDGE, SOUND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ON POLLUTION PREVENTION,
NEW TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT, SOCIOECONOMICS, SUSTAINABLE SYSTEMS, AND
DECISION-MAKING TOOLS. BY 2011, THE PRODUCTS OF THIS RESEARCH WILL BE
INDEPENDENTLY RECOGNIZED AS PROVIDING CRITICAL AND KEY EVIDENCE IN
INFORMING AGENCY POLICES AND DECISIONS AND SOLVING PROBLEMS FOR THE
AGENCY AND ITS PARTNERS AND STAKEHOLDERS.
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR
ENHANCING SUSTAINABILITY
THROUGH SCIENCE AND RESEARCH
ICH
The principles of environmental steward-
ship are based on the belief that our nation's
natural resources are the common property of
all society. Effective stewards of the environ-
ment enhance environmental protection and
achieve sustainable outcomes. Science and
research programs supporting this strategic
goal help identify efficient and sustainable
practices, materials, and technologies to
improve environmental performance and
advance stewardship.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FOR
SUSTAINABILITY
The Science and Technology for
Sustainability (STS) research program
develops models, tools, and technologies that
provide decision makers with options that
can promote stewardship and lead to sustain-
able outcomes. STS research will achieve
measurable results by providing the enhanced
science and technology that can catalyze
innovation and advance environmental
protection; developing more efficient and
sustainable practices, materials, and tech-
nologies; and providing science to support
sound management decisions, policies, and
practices for sustainable resource manage-
ment. Fundamental research under the STS
program includes developing Life Cycle
Assessment and Material Flow Analysis
methodologies; theoretical modeling of
sustainable systems; developing new science-
based Sustainability metrics and indicators;
and the People, Prosperity, and the Planet
Student Design Competition program.
STS research will support the regulated
community in implementing more efficient,
sustainable, and protective practices and
using materials and technologies that can
improve performance while protecting the
environment. We will work with our industry
partners to research new methods, alternative
chemicals, and industrial practices and to
develop tools, for example, that bench
chemists can use to evaluate the environ-
mental dimensions of new chemicals and
-------
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship—Human Capital
production pathways. We have expanded our
Environmental Technology Verification
Program to include an effort focused on
sustainability, the Environmentally
Sustainable Technologies Evaluation
Program. We will develop quality-controlled
test protocols to help verify the capabilities
of new technologies. In addition, we will
continue to conduct our Sustainable
Environmental Systems research program,
which draws on economics, ecology, law, and
engineering to find systems-based solutions to
regional environmental problems.
ECONOMICS AND DECISION SCIENCES
EPA's Economics and Decision Sciences
(EDS) research provides methods and data to
conduct economic analyses and evaluate the
effectiveness of our policies. The results of
HUMAN CAPITAL
To achieve our goals for compliance and
environmental stewardship, we must be
proficient in a number of areas. Our staff
must understand applicable requirements,
possess sector-specific knowledge about
business and industrial processes, keep
current on best practices, and be able to
assess a situation and advise regulated entities
seeking help and guidance.
To improve our interaction with the
regulated community, we will recruit skilled
facilitators and communicators, and we will
encourage current employees to take advantage
of rotations and other opportunities at the
state and local level. Experience in addressing
local or regional problems will provide staff a
broader perspective on the challenges facing
regulators and the regulated community. We
recognize that a broad spectrum of regulatory
and stewardship approaches will be necessary
to advance environmental protection and that
a well-informed EPA workforce, skilled in
collaborative approaches, will be the key
to our success.
these analyses will inform our decision
making and help us develop innovative,
cost-effective approaches.
EDS research will focus on three areas.
First, to improve EPA's cost-benefit analyses,
researchers will develop benefit transfer
methods and original estimates for health
and ecological benefits. Second, researchers
will analyze information and education
strategies for changing behavior, helping us
to promote compliance, improved perform-
ance, and environmental stewardship.
Finally, we will conduct EDS research on
using trading programs for new pollutants,
media, or geographical areas. This research
will help design market-based programs to
improve environmental performance at the
lowest cost. We will also be investigating the
implications that trading programs may have
for environmental justice issues
To conduct our compliance assistance
program and develop incentives for compli-
ance, EPA attorney-advisors, engineers,
environmental protection specialists, and oth-
ers review material submitted by the regulated
community, assess compliance, and craft the
Agency's response, which could include fines
or penalties. EPA will work to ensure that
staff have the necessary skill sets to carry out
compliance monitoring and enforcement pro-
grams (including inspections), civil and
criminal investigations, and administrative
and judicial enforcement actions.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
EPA's compliance strategy is based on
activities that will reduce pollutants entering
the environment, treat them appropriately,
or eliminate them entirely. To assess our
progress, we track pounds of pollution
estimated to have been reduced, treated, or
eliminated—a measure also included in
OMB's Program Assessment Rating Tool
(PART) assessment of the compliance pro-
gram. We have also incorporated the PART
long-term, outcome-oriented measures for
EPA's GAP grants into this Strategic Plan.
To track our annual
progress toward our
research objectives, we
will use a number of
objective measures of
customer satisfaction,
product impact and qual-
ity, and efficiency. For
example, we rely on
independent expert
review panel ratings,
client surveys on the use-
fulness of our products,
and analyses demonstrat-
ing the actual use of EPA
research products.
IMPROVING PERFORMANCE
MEASUREMENT
For the compliance objective of Goal 5,
EPA will begin a process for redesigning the
objective, sub-objectives, and measures. This
redesign will change the focus of the program,
moving from a tool-oriented approach that
measures outcomes from assistance, incentives,
monitoring, and enforcement, to a problem-
oriented approach that measures the extent to
which key environmental problems are
reduced or eliminated. To more accurately
characterize the state of compliance for partic-
ular sectors and regulations, our compliance
program uses statistically-valid compliance
rates. Our focus will be on environmental
problems with significant environmental risks
and important patterns of noncompliance,
specifically in national priority areas.
We are also working to supplement our
pollutant reduction outcome measure with
information that characterizes the hazards
presented by pollutants and potential public
exposure. We are using air pollution models
to estimate the human health benefits of
reduced air pollutants. As a result, in FY
2005, the compliance assurance program
reported that the 10 largest air pollution
cases produced annual human health benefits
valued at more than $4.6 billion dollars by
reducing pollutants by more than 620 million
pounds annually. The compliance and air
programs will continue working together to
expand the types of information on human
health benefits that can be reported for air
pollution cases, and we are exploring oppor-
tunities to report similar information for
cases involving other environmental media.
EPA will use a set of nationally consistent
environmental justice indicators of health,
environment, compliance, and demographics to
identify "Areas with Potential Environmental
Concerns." We will then emphasize activities
in these areas. This effort will better protect all
communities, including minority and/or low-
income communities. We will report on the
impact of our compliance efforts on these areas,
including minority and/or low-income commu-
nities. Based on our experience with the
indicators, we will develop specific environ-
mental justice measures and targets for
compliance assurance activities.
EPA is committed to developing mean-
ingful performance measures that will
allow us to assess our pollution prevention
programs. We will continue to collaborate
with states and tribes to improve our
performance measures and, through the
PART process, review and refine them to
be more outcome oriented.
-------
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship—Using Feedback From Performance Assessments and Program Evaluations
USING FEEDBACK FROM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS AND
PROGRAM EVALUATIONS
EPA met its original goal for reducing
priority chemicals in 2003 (2 years earlier
than anticipated), and we have achieved fur-
ther reductions while re-setting the goal for
this 2006-20J J Strategic Plan. Our early suc-
cess is not proving easily sustainable,
however, as we have begun to exhaust the
more obvious opportunities for waste mini-
mization. Achieving future reductions will be
more difficult and require a different
approach. We are working with states to
develop an approach that targets sectors and
will allow more direct technology transfer
between facilities involved in similar
industrial processes.
The Harvard Regulatory Policy Program
evaluated several aspects of EPA's
Performance Track Program, including differ-
ences among facilities applying for the
program, characteristics of facilities motivated
to apply, and the differences in environmen-
tal performance between Track members and
non-members. The evaluation affirmed the
value of EPA recognition as an incentive for
environmental improvements. The study also
stressed the importance of low transaction
costs as a way of encouraging participation in
innovative programs. We will work to
increase recognition of Performance Track
and the branding associated with the
program, and we will identify firms that
are providing environmental leadership
and refocus our recruiting efforts at the
corporate level.
EPA's Enforcement and Compliance
Program has undergone three PART assess-
ments since FY 2003: civil enforcement
(2003), criminal enforcement (2004), and
pesticides grants (2005). OMB recommenda-
tions resulting from these PART assessments
have been focused on individual program
areas and limited to certain aspects of the
Enforcement and Compliance Program's
management. The program will continue
to improve and refine outcome measurement
and to expand use of statistically-valid
compliance rates. These activities are directly
related to PART follow-up actions.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
EMERGING ISSUES AND EXTERNAL FACTORS
Rapidly changing technology presents
EPA with unique opportunities and chal-
lenges. By 2011, we can expect several
significant scientific external factors arising
in nanotechnology, genomic research, com-
putational toxicology, computer sciences, and
the cognitive and behavioral sciences.
Developing and applying nanotechnologies,
biotechnologies, and sensor technologies
could significantly enhance our ability to
protect human health and the environment.
Progress in these areas will also determine
the future direction of our research programs.
Advances in measurement technology
could also have a significant effect on EPA
programs. As more sensitive technology for
detecting and measuring emissions is
installed in facilities, emissions reporting will
become more accurate. As a result, we may
find emission rates to be higher or lower than
previously reported.
Distributed sensor network technologies,
remote sensing, and hyperspectral imaging
are developing rapidly. These technologies
have the potential to support compliance
monitoring by increasing the frequency and
speed of data collection and transmission;
improving data quality; enabling data inte-
gration; and facilitating data access and data
sharing. Sensors might also facilitate the
acquisition and use of empirical data and
aid in tracking and analyzing the flow of
materials and elements throughout the
industrial cycle.
Nanotechnology could present new
opportunities for pollution prevention and
environmental stewardship (see
www.epa.gov/osa/nanotech.htm). Emerging
nanotechnology applications could potentially
reduce energy demand, develop cleaner
energy, and improve the efficiency of manu-
facturing processes, reducing material use and
waste generation. Pollution prevention pro-
grams can provide a forum for industry and
academia to exchange information on the
environmental effects and benefits of
innovative nanomaterials and promote
environmentally responsible manufacturing
processes and product design. A growing
number of institutional players are encourag-
ing policymakers to study nanotechnology
and develop responses.
These emerging technologies may
also present novel risks. Anticipating the
risks and developing tools to identify
them will become increasingly important
as these technologies develop and enter the
marketplace.
-------
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship—Notes
NOTES:
1. Use of the terms "Indian country," "Indian lands," "tribal lands," "tribal waters," and "tribal areas" within this
Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is
their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs.
2. Pounds of pollutants "reduced, treated, or eliminated" is an EPA measure of the quantity of pollutants that will
no longer be released to the environment as a result of a noncomplying facility returning to its allowable limits
through the successful completion of an enforcement settlement. (Facilities may further reduce pollutants by
carrying out voluntary Supplemental Environmental Projects.) Online compliance information is available to
the public via EPA's Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO) Web Site: www.epa.gov/echo/
EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. Washington, DC. Access July 25, 2006.
3. "Environmental management practices" refers to a specific set of activities EPA tracks to evaluate changes
brought about through assistance, incentives, and concluded enforcement actions. Implementing or improving
environmental management practices—for example, by changing industrial processes; discharges; or testing,
auditing, and reporting—may assist a regulated facility in remaining in compliance with environmental require-
ments. Further information on environmental management practices is available in EPA's Case Conclusion Data
Sheet Training Booklet, available online at: www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/planning/
caseconc.pdf: EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. Washington, DC.
4. Complying actions are actions taken by a facility to address deficiencies, which are potential violations, identi-
fied during on-site inspections and evaluations. Examples of a complying action include correcting record
keeping deficiencies, requesting a permit application, improving pollutant identification (labeling, manifesting,
etc.), improving management practices (storage, training, etc.) or reducing pollution through use reduction,
industrial process change, or emissions or discharge change.
5. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Green Chemistry Web Site, www.epa.gov/greenchemistry.
Washington, DC. Access September 9, 2006.
6. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Design for the Environment Web Site: www.epa.gov/dfe.
Washington, DC. Access September 9, 2006.
7. U.S. EPA, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. National Environmental Policy Act Web Site:
www.epa.gov/compliance/basics/nepa.html*requirement. Washington, DC. Access September 9, 2006.
8. Use of the terms "Indian country," "Indian lands," "tribal lands," "tribal waters," and "tribal areas" within this
Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is
their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs.
9. A tribe is counted as having an environmental program for the purposes of this measure if the tribal govern-
ment has taken at least one of the following actions, in combination with having "an organizational structure
which includes EPA-funded environmental office or coordinator that has been staffed in the most recent year":
(a) Complete a Tier III TEA, as evidenced by a document signed by the tribal government and EPA.
(b) Establish environmental laws, codes, regulations, ordinances, resolutions, policies, or environmental com-
pliance programs, as evidenced by a document signed by the tribal government.
(c) Complete solid and/or hazardous waste implementation activities.
(d) Complete an intergovernmental environmental agreement (e.g., state-tribe MOA, federal-tribe MOA,
etc).
10. Intertribal consortia are groups of federally-recognized tribes that meet the criteria for EPA purposes that join
to work together.
11. Use of the terms "Indian country," "Indian lands," "tribal lands," "tribal waters," and "tribal areas" within this
Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is
their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs.
-------
-------
Cross-Goal
-------
Many of EPAs efforts—strengthening our partner-
ships with states and tribes, improving the quality and
Each of these efforts is a significant component of
our work and plays a critical role in the accomplishment
availability of the environmental and health information of all of our goals. This chapter highlights a few of these
on which we base our decisions, and improving our
cross-goal strategies: Partnerships, Information,
management systems to achieve better
results—contribute to our progress
toward all five of our goals. This
cross-Agency, cross-media work
includes both support functions, such
CONTENTS
Results and
Accountability:
Innovation and
Collaboration:
Best Available Science:
Innovation, Human Capital,
Science, Homeland Security, and
Economic and Policy Analysis. For
each, we will discuss the Agency's
approach, explain how the strategy
as administrative and financial management or legal
will contribute to the achievement of our goals, and
services, and the strategies or means we employ to help describe some of the activities we will conduct and results
accomplish our objectives, such as science and research or we hope to achieve using this approach.
information management.
148
-------
Cross-Goa! Strategies—Results and Accountability
RESULTS AND ACCOUNTABILITY
EPA is committed to being not only a
good steward of the environment, but also a
good steward of the public's tax dollars.
Guided by the principles of the President's
Management Agenda (PMA)1—to be
"citizen-centered, results-oriented, and
market-based"—we are working to improve
the efficiency and effectiveness of our
programs and activities. We are continuing
to make progress under each of the PMA
initiatives and other significant efforts to
improve program effectiveness and efficiency
as described below.
ASSESSING THE STATE OF THE
ENVIRONMENT AND MEASURING
PROGRESS
To define our goals, measure our progress,
and hold managers accountable for achieving
results, EPA needs accurate, timely environ-
mental data. Based on the preliminary work
we did to prepare EPA's Draft Report on the
Environment—2003, we are developing and
using a suite of scientifically sound indicators
to track trends in environmental conditions
and environmental influences on human
health. This indicator information, which we
will present in our Report on the
Environment—Technical Document (to be
released in 2007), will provide a snapshot of
current environmental conditions and a
baseline against which we can measure
our accomplishments.
Our environmental indicators work is
critical to EPA's strategic planning. We
have used our latest set of environmental
indicators in developing this Strategic Plan;
indicator information has guided us in
establishing our 2006-2011 strategic goals,
objectives, sub-objectives, and associated
strategic targets, which define the measurable
environmental results we are trying
to achieve. Information on trends in
environmental conditions and human health
will also help us identify key environmental
concerns and emerging issues and assess the
effect of federal, state, local, tribal, and
private efforts in improving environmental
quality. We will continue to use environmen-
tal indicator information and our Report on
the Environment to determine critical data
needs for future strategic planning.
MAKING INFORMATION
MORE ACCESSIBLE
EPA's information systems ensure that we
and our federal, state, tribal, and local agency
partners have the accurate, timely informa-
tion we need to make sound decisions.
To make environmental information readily
accessible, we have created a computer
network that connects EPA and our contrac-
tors with states and tribes, standardized our
computer systems, implemented data
standards, and instituted a variety of
streamlining efforts.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
EPA will continue to identify information
technology and information management
challenges and to address them as effectively
and cost efficiently as possible. Over the next
5 years, we will focus on four major areas:
• Analytical Capacity. We will continue
to convert raw environmental data
into information that decision
makers can use more easily. For
example, our geospatial work is
converting millions of pieces of
data into maps.
• Governance. We will ensure that the
data EPA collects are of appropriate
quality and design, that the data
will serve many users, and that we
minimize system overlaps to avoid
conflict and reduce costs.
• Excellence in Information Service
Delivery. EPA will use the latest tech-
nology to streamline management
and data processes and link data
partners, making information more
accessible to all.
• Innovation in Information
Management. Through electronic
government (E-Gov) efforts, we will
continue to convert paper-based
administrative or regulatory processes
into electronic systems, improving
transparency and accessibility, and
reducing paper waste.
INTEGRATING
BUDGET AND
PERFORMANCE
INFORMATION
One of the first
federal agencies to
link our planning
and budgeting struc-
tures, EPA is now
working to align
our financial and
human resources more closely with the envi-
ronmental results we deliver.
Our Budget and Performance Integration effort
under the PMA promotes better performance;
enables more informed decision making;
increases accountability; and allows more
transparent, comprehensive reporting of
environmental results to the public.
To ensure consistent, effective perform-
ance across EPA, we have developed
long-term measures of program performance
in our Strategic Plan that establish ambitious
yet reasonable expectations for future
environmental outcomes. These long-term
measures establish the framework for crafting
annual performance and efficiency measures
that meet Office of Management and
Budget's Program Assessment Rating Tool
requirements. EPA collects and analyzes
performance information against these
measures to assess program performance over
time and to evaluate the effectiveness of our
approaches to environmental problems.
Based on these evaluations, we can adjust or
modify our strategies to achieve better results.
To encourage EPA staff and our partners to
be accountable for delivering environmental
results effectively and cost efficiently, we are
also incorporating performance measures in
EPA managers' performance agreements and,
as appropriate, in our contracts, grants, and
memoranda of understanding. These
performance measures strengthen the
connection between an individual's or
organization's contribution and the delivery
of environmental results. Linking our staff's
and our partners' performance to EPA's
mission, goals, and expectations for environ-
mental outcomes increases everyone's
commitment to improving results.
IMPROVING FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE
AND ELIMINATING IMPROPER PAYMENTS
EPA has undertaken a multi-office data
integration effort which uses financial
-------
Cross-Goa! Strategies—Results and Accountability
information to improve program efficiency
and ensure sound financial management.
We are focusing on financial information
related to one business process at a time as
part of our efforts under the PMA. In
FY 2005, for example, we reviewed grants
management. We have made progress in link-
ing grants management and financial data,
producing better information that shows the
relationship between grant projects and EPA's
environmental objectives. Next we will
review emergency management and, in future
efforts, analyze such key risk areas as debt
management and contracts management.
In another PMA initiative to improve
our financial performance, we are working to
eliminate improper payments. Under this
effort we will identify, prevent, and eliminate
erroneous payments and document that the
government is using tax dollars for their
intended purpose. While EPA's improper pay-
ments are minimal, we are committed to
reducing the error rate for improper payments
even further. For example, in FY 2004 EPA's
error rate in the Drinking Water and Clean
Water State Revolving Funds, 2 of EPA's
largest sources of grant funding, was
0.51 percent, or $10.3 million; by the end
of FY 2005 we reduced it to 0.16 percent,
or $3.1 million. We will continue to
uphold high standards of integrity for
financial performance.
MEETING HUMAN CAPITAL NEEDS
EPA has designed our Human Capital
Strategy to ensure that our workforce is high-
performing, results-oriented, aligned with
our strategic goals and objectives, and
accountable for delivering environmental
results consistent with the PMA. Toward this
end, our human capital planning will require
us to identify the skills we will need for
future work, attract and retain diverse talent,
provide continuing opportunities for organi-
zational learning, develop leaders, and ensure
adequate succession planning.
Jll
Moreover,
because EPA increas-
ingly relies on
partnerships and col-
laborative endeavors
to accomplish our
work, our strategic
human capital plan-
ning must also
consider our relation-
ships with such
partners as other fed-
eral agencies, state
and local govern-
ments, tribes,
grantees, contractors,
and other stakeholders. We need to ensure
that all available expertise is brought to bear
to achieve our goals for protecting human
health and the environment.
Over the next 5 years, we anticipate a
dramatic increase in "baby boomer" retire-
ments across both the public and private
sectors. To attract and retain the right people
in the right jobs for both the short and long
terms, we will work to elevate EPA's profile as
an employer of choice, increase our use of
hiring flexibilities, and emphasize intern and
career development programs.
INCREASING EFFICIENCY THROUGH
COMPETITIVE SOURCING
Competitive sourcing—using competition
to determine whether federal or private sector
employees can most efficiently and effectively
perform work that is not inherently govern-
mental—is a key element of the PMA and
EPA's effort to deliver environmental results
and ensure accountability. Competitive sourc-
ing helps EPA determine the optimal mix of
federal employees and contractor personnel
for achieving the best results and highest
quality of service for our investment. The
competitive process drives innovation and
efficiency, enabling us to reinvest resultant
savings in high-priority activities.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
Our competitive sourcing program aligns
EPA's business needs with our Human
Capital Strategy and uses our planning
process to identify activities for competition
and reinvestment. Through competitive
sourcing, we have already realized efficiencies
in delivering certain of our financial and
information technology services; as a result,
we expect to make savings of more than
$10 million available for reinvestment during
the next 5 years. Over the next 3 years, we
plan to conduct competitive sourcing
competitions for additional information tech-
nology and administrative support services,
and we anticipate that these competitions
will save EPA 15-25 percent.
INCREASING EFFICIENCY
THROUGH ELECTRONIC
GOVERNMENT (E-Gov)
EPA is pursuing a
number of opportunities
for leveraging electronic
tools and capabilities to
provide one-stop access to
services and transactions,
reduce duplication in col-
lecting information, and
provide transparent, time-
ly, on-line data. Whether
f
n
/
for improving electronic processing and
streamlining flows of the Toxics Release
Inventory data, or developing new geospatial
tools for analyzing environmental data, our
E-Gov work is making current data more
accessible to EPA managers and stakeholders.
EPA is participating in 18 of the
25 E-Gov initiatives included in the PMA.
As the "managing partner" for the
E-Rulemaking initiative, we are coordinating
the efforts of nine other agencies to redesign
the rulemaking process. E-Rulemaking uses
the internet to make the rulemaking process
more accessible to interested parties. While
federal rulemaking was once a paper-based
process, E Rulemaking now offers one-stop
access and user services such as text and
document search capabilities and the
ability for the public to submit comments
electronically. EPA's system will serve as a
template to improve existing "E-DOCKET"
systems and will replace duplicative systems
in many federal agencies.
As a leader in E-Gov, we are helping to
simplify and unify common work processes
across federal agencies and within EPA. We
will continue applying new principles and
methods to achieve better results, improve
customer service, and provide greater savings
to the American people.
INNOVATION AND COLLABORATION
EPA's progress over the next several
years will depend greatly on our ability and
commitment to find more effective tools and
approaches to meet today's complex environ-
mental challenges. Broad-based problems,
such as polluted runoff, global climate
change, and loss of habitat and biodiversity,
are often the result of diffuse causes and
cannot be solved fully with conventional
regulatory controls. Rapid technological and
scientific advances can bring breakthrough
solutions, but also pose unknown or
unexpected environmental and public
health risks.
As EPA faces these complex challenges
and a tightening federal budget, we increas-
ingly turn to two important strategies that
cross all of our goals and programs: finding
innovative solutions and collaborating with
others. In the coming years we must work
even more effectively with organizations
engaged in environmental issues, leveraging
-------
Cross-Goa! Strategies—Innovation and Collaboration
limited resources and coordinating our
authorities and capabilities. We also must
involve other government agencies, businesses,
communities, and individuals who might not
ordinarily focus on environmental matters,
yet have the distinctive expertise,
perspectives, and resources to help solve
environmental problems.
To make the greatest progress, we will pro-
mote an ethic of environmental stewardship
that engages all parts of society—businesses,
companies, communities, and individuals—in
taking responsibility for environmental quali-
ty and achieving sustainable results.
Environmental stewardship is based on the
premise that government cannot meet envi-
ronmental challenges alone. Rather we
need all parts of society to understand how
environmental protection aligns with
broader social and economic interests and
to engage with us in actively creating a
sustainable future.
INNOVATING TO IMPROVE
ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS
Innovation is key to environmental
progress. Innovation involves developing
new ideas, testing their effectiveness, and
then determining useful applications. It also
involves making proven approaches even
more effective or adapting them to address
other needs. To drive progress under this
Strategic Plan, EPA's innovation strategy is
based on four elements.
Promoting State and Tribal Innovation.
Because states and tribes are on the frontlines
of environmental protection, they are in the
best position to recognize problems and craft
innovative solutions. EPA is committed to
supporting innovation in state and tribal
programs in a variety of ways. For example,
states participate in EPA's Innovation Action
Council. Through this senior-level policy
forum, we jointly develop an innovation
work plan that focuses attention on priority
issues. Together, we are finding innovative
approaches to program management
challenges, such as developing total maxi-
mum daily loads for impaired water bodies or
using alternative approaches for managing
hazardous waste under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act.
We also support states through the
competitive State Innovation Grant program
which, since 2003, has provided funding to
help states explore innovative approaches in
three areas of mutual interest to EPA and
states—environmental permitting, environ-
mental management systems, and
performance-based leadership programs. For
example, these funds have been instrumental
in helping states adapt an innovative
approach to permitting first developed in
Massachusetts. Today, 15 states are develop-
ing or applying programs similar to
Massachusetts' Environmental Results
Program to improve environmental
performance in small business sectors, such
as dry cleaning and printing.
Similarly, our Innovative Funding
Workgroup, supported through EPA's Indian
Program Policy Council, is developing
options for the strategic and innovative use of
funding, resources, and other opportunities to
effect environmental change. The workgroup
seeks to understand all of the various mecha-
nisms that EPA and other agencies are using
or could use to enhance coordination and
environmental protection in Indian country.2
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
SUPPORTING THE GROWING INTEREST IN
GREEN BUILDING
Buildings and development have extensive effects on
human health, natural resource use, and environmental
quality. However; a growing interest in green building
aims to reduce those impacts. Green building is the
practice of creating healthier; more resource-efficient
models of construction, renovation, operation, mainte-
nance, and demolition.While many EPA programs
work with the building and construction sectors to
improve environmental performance, a cross-Agency
Green Building Workgroup is bringing these programs
together to share information, leverage resources, and
pursue their common objectives with external stake-
holders who have joined the green building
movement.The Workgroup is a model of collabora-
tion, and its emergence represents the kind of culture
change that is called for in EPA's Innovation Strategy. It
shows how EPA recognized an external trend and is
responding with a multimedia approach that can
advance all five of our strategic goals.
Focusing on Priority Problems. While
innovation is essential for addressing all
environmental challenges, EPA's innovation
strategy targets a set of priority problems that
are national in scope and in need of creative
new ideas to assure progress: reducing green-
house gases and ozone, restoring water
quality, and addressing the funding gap for
water infrastructure. Our strategy commits
us to consider all potential avenues to
address these diverse issues-regulations,
policy, guidance, voluntary initiatives,
and compliance assistance. By exploring
such options, we can create a more diverse
portfolio of solutions for these and
future problems.
Developing Problem-Solving Tools and
Approaches. EPA needs new tools and
approaches to solve existing environmental
protection problems and to prevent the
emergence of new ones. We believe the
future environmental protection system will
rely less on technology requirements and
more on strategies tailored to address whole
facilities, communities, or industry sectors. It
also will emphasize pollution prevention and
natural resource conservation. Our innova-
tion strategy focuses on developing tools that
will expand current capabilities, for example,
by supporting environmental technology
innovation, increasing incentives, encourag-
ing the use of environmental management
systems, and developing results-oriented
performance goals and measures.
Creating a Culture and Organizational
Systems to Foster Innovation. Under the
fourth element of our innovation strategy,
we are working to foster innovation by
changing our organizational culture and
management systems. We recognize the need
to improve our planning, budgeting, and
accountability processes and invest in our
human capital. We are also committed to
futures planning to ensure that we and our
partners are aware of and ready to respond to
new trends and opportunities that can affect
environmental quality.
-------
Cross-Goa! Strategies—Innovation and Collaboration
COLLABORATING ON COMMON GOALS
Collaboration is critical to addressing
today's more complex and often controversial
issues. EPA has a long history of working
successfully with others on environmental
problems, breaking through institutional and
other barriers to achieve more comprehen-
sive results than we could by working alone.
Collaborative approaches can produce more
effective and durable decisions, because they
generate a shared sense of ownership among
the stakeholders who will implement them.
Collaboration on data gathering and analysis
boosts the potential for agreement and can
transform our understanding of environmen-
tal problems.
We will continue to enhance our capacity
to collaborate with others, and we will
increase our managers' and staff's "collabora-
tion competency," helping them know when
and how to engage productively with others.
Further, we are identifying new opportunities
for involving stakeholders, making internal
and external collaborative process experts
more available to help facilitate complex
decision making, and implementing a set
of initiatives with other federal agencies
to strengthen our collective ability to
work with the public.
With States
The unique relationship between EPA and
states is a cornerstone of the nation's environ-
mental protection system: working together,
we have significantly improved environmental
quality and public health. Delegated state
programs conduct much of the day-to-day
work involved in environmental programs—
including issuing permits, conducting
compliance and enforcement activities, and
monitoring environmental conditions—and
EPA oversees these activities.
In addition to our partnerships with
individual state environmental, public health,
and agriculture agencies, EPA works at the
national level with a variety of associations
A STRATEGY FOR REDUCING ELECTRONICS WASTE
With America's increasing reliance on electronics,
how can we best address the burgeoning problem
of electronic waste? Part of the solution is supporting
the market for environmentally-preferable electronic
products.That is the goal of the Federal Electronics
Challenge, an EPA partnership program that leverages
the $65 billion spent annually in the United States on
electronic equipment and services. Under this challenge,
government agencies commit to making electronic pur-
chases that meet certain environmental criteria, such as
reduced use of toxic substances, virgin materials, and
energy, thereby harnessing their considerable buying
power to ensure that these greener goods are available
for many other purchasers as well.
representing state governments. These organi-
zations provide the state perspective that EPA
needs to shape policies and programs. We
work closely with the National Governors
Association, National Council of State
Legislatures, and the Environmental Council
of the States, as well as with groups represent-
ing managers of specific environmental media
programs, such as the Association of State
and Interstate Water Pollution Control
Administrators.
In 1995, EPA and state officials created
the National Environmental Performance
Partnership System, the foundation for our
work with states. Through this system of
performance-based partnerships, EPA and
states are setting environmental priorities
and program strategies, improving how we
measure performance, implementing innova-
tive solutions to environmental problems,
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
COLLABORATING WITH STATES ON
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
One of the best examples of state and EPA
collaboration is the National Environmental
Information Exchange Network. Designed to
help states and EPA share information more
efficiently and effectively over the internet, this
system provides real-time access to high quality
data while saving agencies time and money once
spent on paper-based data entry and reporting.
Since 2002, EPA has provided more than
$80 million in grants to help states, as well as tribes
and territories, develop this Web-based system.
The results are revolutionizing the exchange of
environmental data. Several states are
now using the Exchange Network to v
allow industries to submit their water
discharge monitoring reports
electronically. Others are using
it to provide the public with
timely beach closure and
^
I
and strengthening data collection and
management. Critical to this work is finding
ways to maximize flexibility so that states can
address their own priority needs while
ensuring accountability for results.
With Tribes
EPA's work with tribes is based on the
recognition that tribes have unique cultural,
jurisdictional, and legal issues that must be
considered when coordinating and imple-
menting environmental programs in Indian
country. One of their cultural distinctions is a
longstanding commitment to environmental
stewardship. Native Americans recognize the
importance of not only protecting the envi-
ronment, but of pursuing a longer-term goal
of sustainability—a perspective that has much
to offer as EPA pursues stewardship efforts.
EPA works with each tribe on a govern-
ment-to-government basis. The Agency's
1984 Indian Policy formally recognizes the
uniqueness of tribes and their rights as
sovereign governments. In keeping with
that policy, EPA will pursue innovative and
coordinated programs that complement tribal
government structures and incorporate
tribal priorities to protect human health and
the environment in Indian country.
As part of the National Tribal Operations
Committee, EPA's Administrator, Deputy
Administrator, and other senior Agency
officials work with 19 elected or appointed
tribal leaders, who comprise the National
Tribal Caucus, to address environmental and
human health issues in Indian country.
EPA's nine regions with federal Indian tribes
have similar working relationships or
mechanisms in place for this purpose.
With Local Qovernments
Local governments are uniquely posi-
tioned to collaborate with EPA, other public
agencies, and the private sector in finding
ways to make life better for their citizens.
Regulatory tools, such as land use planning
authorities, building and health codes,
and other ordinances allow local governments
to address problems falling outside federal or
state jurisdiction. At the national level, EPA's
Local Government Advisory Committee pro-
vides advice and recommendations for
building state and local capacity to deliver
environmental services and programs.
With Other Federal Agencies
The President's 2004 Executive Order on
Cooperative Conservation placed new
emphasis on the need for collaboration on
environmental problem-solving by calling
for expanded cooperation among federal
agencies with environmental and natural
resource responsibilities. EPA will continue
to be an active partner in Cooperative
-------
Cross-Goa! Strategies—Innovation and Collaboration
Conservation and seek opportunities for fur-
ther coordination with our federal partners.
One especially important component of
Cooperative Conservation is a competency-
based approach to developing collaboration
and partnering skills in the federal workforce.
In 2006, EPA developed a dynamic initial
plan, which will be revised through dialogue
with Agency staff and management, to
ensure that these skills are a part of hiring,
training, and recognizing EPA employees. By
implementing this plan, we will enhance
EPA's capability to foster collaborative prob-
lem-solving and attain our environmental
and public health objectives.
With Other Countries
As our understanding of environmental
issues has increased, so has our appreciation
of the need to partner with other countries
on environmental goals. International coop-
eration is vital to achieving our mission, and
EPA has established three strategic priority
areas for our international engagement.
Reduce Transboundary Pollution. Air pollu-
tion and toxic substances generated in other
countries circulate through the atmosphere
and can ultimately reach the United States.
To meet many of our domestic environmental
protection goals, therefore, we must address
international sources of pollutants. In many
cases, it is more efficient to reduce emissions
from foreign sources than from domestic ones.
For example, the majority of all mercury
deposited in the United States originates from
outside of our borders, and water-borne dis-
ease is greater along the U.S.-Mexico border
than in the rest of the United States due to
inadequate wastewater treatment. We must
collaborate with our international partners to
solve these and other problems.
Advance U.S. Interests Abroad. Our
shared goals for environmental protection
can open doors between the United States
and foreign governments. Assisting other
countries in their environmental protection
efforts can be an effective part of a larger
U.S. strategy for promoting sustainable
LEARNING FROM LOCAL LEADERS
Bartow County, Georgia is a model for collaborative environmental problem-solving at the
local level. A fast-growing area northwest of Atlanta, Bartow County is implementing the
first county-wide environmental management system in the nation. Designed to significantly
reduce pollution across the county, this program is the result of a partnership that includes
six cities, two school districts, the local chamber of commerce, several industry leaders, and
the agricultural community. Over the past several years, the county has conducted a base-
line audit of environmental performance and has developed environmental management
resources, such as a Web site database for tracking air emissions, waste minimization, and
water quality, and an air quality "tool box" for local officials. Air emissions have already been
reduced by 25 percent. Based on its results, the Bartow County program is gaining atten-
tion at all levels of government; it was among the models showcased at the 2005 White
•ence on cooperative conservai
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
development and advancing democratic
ideals. EPA supports U.S. diplomatic, trade,
and foreign policy goals that extend far
beyond our domestic agenda.
Promote Good Environmental Governance.
Good environmental governance abroad not
only yields a cleaner environment, it helps
ensure that U.S. companies and communities
compete on an equal footing in the interna-
tional marketplace. In particular, EPA works
with U.S. trading partners to help them
enforce their own environmental laws.
Through leadership in the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development,
EPA supports environmental performance
reviews of other countries so that good gover-
nance best practices—such as providing access
to information, collaborating with diverse
stakeholders, and providing transparency in
environmental decision making—are shared
and countries continually improve.
BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE
Effective, proactive environmental
protection requires a strong foundation of
scientific knowledge. EPA uses the best avail-
able scientific approaches, data, and models
to anticipate potential threats, evaluate risks,
identify solutions, and develop standards that
protect the environment and safeguard
human health. Our science strategy is
designed to generate the data we need
to understand and manage risks and to
guide research that can inform our
decision making.
ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS
EPA works with states and tribes and
across public and private sectors, drawing
on the best scientific information available
to help us ask the right questions and
characterize problems clearly.
Our intramural research program con-
ducts leading-edge research to help us
understand the biological, physical/chemical,
social, and other processes that drive envi-
ronmental systems, and it provides the
fundamental scientific basis for addressing a
wide variety of environmental problems. For
example, our intramural research program
produces information used to conduct assess-
ments for EPA's Integrated Risk Information
System (IRIS), an electronic database of
information on human health effects that
may result from exposure to various chemi-
cals in the environment. IRIS is a valuable
risk assessment tool for EPA's regulatory pro-
grams, states, and industry. To guide our
intramural program, EPA prepares multiyear
research plans that set out the research goals
we intend to achieve over a 5-10 year period
and establish annual performance goals and
measures of our progress.3
Each of EPA's environmental programs is
supported by scientists and engineers with
specialized program knowledge. Toxicologists,
hydrologists, ecologists, and other experts
apply best available science to implement our
programs. For example, these experts may
identify appropriate criteria for assessing
water quality, set air pollutant standards
that protect human health, explain fate
and transport of pollutants in soil and
groundwater, or characterize complex
ecosystem responses to stress.
-------
Cross-Goa! Strategies—Best Available Science
EPA's regional offices also rely on
scientific expertise. The National Regional
Science Council (NRSC), composed of
representatives from each of 10 Regional
Science Councils, develops informational
products; sponsors conferences, workshops,
and training; fosters collaboration; and
identifies common regional needs.4 The
Tribal Science Council provides another
forum that encourages key stakeholders to
work with us on environmental science
issues in Indian country,5 including research,
monitoring, modeling, data, technology,
and training.
Our competitive Science to Achieve
Results (STAR) program funds research
grants and graduate fellowships in many
environmental science and engineering
disciplines. STAR engages the nation's best
scientists and engineers in targeted research
that complements EPA's intramural research
program and those of our federal agency
partners. Through this competitive process,
we also periodically establish large research
centers to address specific areas of national
concern, such as children's health, hazardous
substances, particulate matter, and estuarine
and coastal monitoring.
EPA's Science Inventory6 reflects the
full range of our science activities: research,
technical assistance, assessments, scientific
and technical products, and peer reviews.
A searchable catalogue of science activities,
peer-reviewed products, and EPA archival
records, the Inventory helps EPA scientists
and managers track and coordinate scientific
initiatives and serves as a resource for people
interested in state-of-the-science at EPA.
ASSURING SCIENCE QUALITY
EPA's quality assurance programs ensure
the integrity of environmental data by over-
seeing monitoring programs, approving data
collection activity plans, and evaluating moni-
toring and laboratory practices. For example,
as part of EPA's 2002 Information Quality
Guidelines,7 we must ensure that the material
our regulatory programs present to support risk
assessments is comprehensive and informative.
The information must be accessible enough to
make our methodology, as well as our plans for
identifying and evaluating risk, understandable
to affected populations.
A key strategy for assuring science
quality is peer review, an EPA priority for
many years. EPA's Peer Review Policy8
requires that major scientific and technical
work products be reviewed by qualified,
independent scientists outside of EPA.
Peer review enhances credibility, uncovers
technical problems, identifies additional
information needs, and ensures that conclu-
sions that follow from data comport with
generally accepted scientific standards.
The National Academy of Sciences (NAS),
our Science Advisory Board (SAB), and the
Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) are
among the scientific organizations that
review our products and advise EPA.
USING SCIENCE CORRECTLY
EPA organizes much of its scientific
information around the principles of
risk assessment and risk management.
We conduct risk assessments to help us
understand the relative size (magnitude) and
likelihood (probability) of risk that environ-
mental stressors, such as air pollution or
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
Risk assessment
Risk management
chemicals in drinking water, pose to human
health and ecosystems. Risk management
involves determining whether and how to
reduce such risks.
Risk assessment is critical to EPA's work;
we integrate risk assessments with economic
data, engineering studies, and other informa-
tion to provide the comprehensive scientific
analyses we need to inform our decisions.
Our Risk Assessment Forum, a standing
committee of senior EPA scientists, focuses
on fundamental, generic issues concerning
risk assessments and related science policy
and promotes Agency-wide consensus on
difficult or controversial issues. EPA's Risk
Characterization Policy and Handbook9
guides our scientists in characterizing risk
assessments properly.
Our Action Development Process also
ensures that EPA's decisions are well
informed by sound science and high quality
data. Through this process, EPA's senior
managers can consider a broad range of
regulatory and non-regulatory options and
analytic approaches in the earliest stages of
project planning. The Action Development
Process ensures that EPA scientists,
economists, and other technical experts are
appropriately involved in determining
research and analysis needs, identifying
alternatives, and selecting options.
A number of entities within EPA support
our science efforts:
• The Office of Science Policy applies
scientific expertise from within EPA's
Office of Research and Development
to ensure that consistent, cross-
Agency scientific results, aided by
technical evaluation and peer review,
are part of our regulatory and policy
decisions.
• Our Science Policy Council (SPC),
chaired by the EPA's Science
Advisor, addresses significant
Agency-wide science policy issues.
The SPC has produced the
Genomics Action Plan, EPA's
Nanotechnology White Paper, and
the Risk Assessment Principles and
Practices Staff Paper.
• The Council on Regulatory
Environmental Modeling guides us in
developing and using environmental
models. The Council has developed
an inventory of the EPA models
that are used most frequently
and continues to promote open,
transparent model design.
Scientific information often includes some
degree of uncertainty, inviting a diversity of
interpretations. However, scientists are
increasingly able to calculate and quantify
uncertainty. For example, states most often
cite nutrients, pathogens, and sediments as
the stressors contributing to impaired surface
waters. But our ability to measure pathogens
and infer their sources within watersheds is
very limited, and the quantitative dose-
response data for sediments are virtually
non-existent. As a result, uncertainty is high,
and it limits EPA's and states' ability to meet
water quality goals. Accordingly, we attach a
high value on research to address these prob-
lems. Similarly, EPA places a high priority on
efforts to reduce the uncertainty associated
with calculating the reference dose, reference
concentration, or benchmark dose. The
Stochastic Human Exposure and Dose
Simulation model and the Exposure Related
Dose Estimating Model are two examples of
promising physically-based probabilistic
computer models designed to estimate human
exposure, absorbed dose, and eliminated dose.
-------
Cross-Goa! Strategies—Best Available Science
MEASURING SUCCESS
Measuring our performance is key to
improving it. Regulatory agencies are
accountable for demonstrating that their
expenditures result in measurable outcomes.
For EPA, that means linking regulatory and
policy decisions—reducing emissions of par-
ticulate matter, for example—to quantifiable
improvements in public health and ecologi-
cal condition-fewer deaths from
cardiovascular disease.
Empirical observations and research are
increasing our ability to measure the effec-
tiveness of our programs and to adjust and
improve them to gain efficiencies and meet
our goals. We will continue to improve the
ways we use existing information to assess our
performance by strengthening systems that
monitor environmental conditions and
developing surveillance systems that track
ecological or health outcomes.
EPA's Report on the Environment work has
also advanced our performance measurement,
using existing and new analytical information
to describe current national environmental
conditions and trends and identify additional
research needs. The work we are doing to
prepare our Report on the Environment—
Technical Document (to be released in 2007)
will further our efforts to frame innovative
solutions to complex cross-goal issues and
advance rigorous scientific approaches to
measuring associated outcomes.
Under the President's Management
Agenda initiative, EPA is applying explicit
research and development (R&D) invest-
ment criteria to improve R&D program
management, inform funding decisions, and
increase public understanding of the benefits
of their R&D investments. EPA's R&D
programs have well-conceived plans that
identify program goals and priorities and are
linked to regional and national needs.
These plans are developed by Research
Coordination Teams, comprising program
office, regional, and research program repre-
sentatives, to ensure strong coordination.
"!^
.,*»"
«*'
.**•
^
'&>
&
.!»'
^'
»t7-
'?*>
• ' v^
i,
«^-
,'•'
(*"
•*
-------
••»«
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
NOTES
1. U.S. Office of Management and Budget. 2002. The President's Management Agenda,: FY 2002. Washington, DC:
U.S. Government Printing Office. Available online at: www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2002/mgmt.pdf:
Executive Office of the President, OMB Web Site. Date of Access: September 15, 2003.
2. Use of the terms "Indian country," "Indian lands," "tribal lands," "tribal waters," and "tribal areas" within this
Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is
their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs.
3. Refer to: www.epa.gov/osp/research.htm.
4. Refer to: http://intranet.epa.gov/ospintra/scienceportal/.
5. Use of the terms "Indian country," "Indian lands," "tribal lands," "tribal waters," and "tribal areas" within this
Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is
their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs.
6. Refer to: www.epa.gov/si.
7. Refer to: www.epa.gov/quality/informationguidelines/.
8. See "Peer Review and Peer Involvement at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency" and the second edition of the
Peer Review Handbook, which provides detailed guidance for implementing the policy (www.epa.gov/peerreview.)
9. Refer to: www.epa.gov/OSA/spc/pdfs/rchandbk.pdf.
-------
APPENDIX A:
Social Costs
and Benefits
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
APPENDIX A—SOCIAL COSTS AND BENEFITS
Evaluating the benefits and costs of EPA
programs is extremely useful for strategic
planning at EPA. Generally, we examine how
we can allocate resources and target policies
so as to achieve the maximum net benefits
for society, given statutory and other consid-
erations. In addition to using benefit-cost
analysis in our strategic planning,
Presidential Executive Order 12866,
"Regulatory Planning and Review,"1 requires
EPA to use benefit-cost analysis when formu-
lating economically significant regulations.
Specifically, Executive Order 12866 directs
that agencies "in choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches...should select those
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic, environmen-
tal, public health and safety, and other
advantages, distributive impacts, and equity),
unless a statute requires another regulatory
approach." In a similar manner, strategic
goals and objectives also should reflect
approaches that maximize net benefits and
provide the best investment of society's limit-
ed resources.
EPA regularly publishes benefit-cost
analyses of its proposed and final regulations,
and the Office of Management and Budget
also produces estimates of the economic con-
sequences of federal regulations in its annual
Report to Congress on the Costs and Benefits of
Federal Regulations.2 It is often very difficult to
provide quantitative estimates of the costs,
and particularly the benefits, of environmental
policies because many health and ecological
benefits do not easily lend themselves to
monetization. However, even when data are
limited, assessing benefits and costs still can
be valuable because it enumerates the types
of beneficial and detrimental consequences
resulting from policy actions.
Appendix 1 of EPA's 2003-2008 Strategic
Plan described the social costs and benefits of
its programs for the year 2002. The analysis
was limited largely because EPA's economic
models and tools have not been developed to
estimate the aggregate costs and benefits of
achieving the kind of ambitious, broad, long-
term goals adopted in strategic planning.
Although new analyses have not been
performed for the 2006-2011 Strategic Plan,
EPA will separately be providing additional
information on some of the social costs and
benefits of its programs and policies. For
example, we anticipate releasing a report by
Summer 2007 on the results of our 2006
Pollution Abatement Cost and Expenditures
Survey. Earlier versions of the survey support
many of the estimates used in the 2003-2008
Strategic Plan appendix, but results from the
current survey will not be available in time
to be used in the 2006-20J J Strategic Plan.
EPA's 2003-2008 Strategic Plan Social Costs
and Benefits Appendix can be accessed at:
www.epa.gov/ocfo/plan/2003sp.pdf (pages
173-214).
1. The Executive Order 12866—(Federal Register: September 30, 1993, Vol. 58, No. 190, Pg. 51735) can be
accessed at: www.epa.gov/fedgstr/eo/eol286.htm.
2. OMB's annual report to Congress can be accessed at: www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg/
regpol-reports_congress.html.
-------
APPENDIX B:
Proposed Future
Program Evaluations
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
APPENDIX B—PROPOSED FUTURE PROGRAM EVALUATIONS
Program evaluation is a formal assess-
ment, through objective measurement and
systematic analysis, of the manner and extent
to which government programs achieve
intended objectives. A focused program eval-
uation will examine specifically identified
factors of a program in a more comprehensive
way than day-to-day experience provides.
Evaluating environmental programs enables
EPA to continuously streamline and modern-
ize our operations while managing our
programs, promoting continuous improve-
ment, and supporting innovation. We can
also incorporate the lessons we learn into
other programs. This appendix lists proposed
program evaluations that support EPA's five
strategic goals by goal and objective.
GOAL 1
Evaluation
Measuring
Effectiveness of the
Air Toxics
Monitoring
Program in the
EPA Region 9
office
Strategic Goal
and Objective
Goal 1, Objective 1
Proposed General Scope
and Issues To Be Addressed
EPA is planning to conduct a systematic analysis
of the effectiveness of its San Francisco regional
office's Air Toxics Monitoring Program in meet-
ing program objectives. The evaluation will
include analysis of data from several sources,
which will be used to develop a logic model based
on outcomes, resources, customers, and federal,
state, local, and tribal activities. As a result of the
evaluation, quantitative measures will more clear-
ly link the region's contributions to the national
Air Toxics Program's GPRA goals, and the assess-
ment will be relevant to national program design
developments.
Timeframe
FY2007
GOAL 2
Evaluation
Assessment of
Public Water
Supply Logic
Model
Strategic Goal
and Objective
Goal 2, Objective 1
Proposed General Scope
and Issues To Be Addressed
The proposed project is an assessment of the
FY 2006 piloting of the Public Water System
Supervision logic model as a tool for oversight,
program assessment, and program management.
Discussion will center on lessons learned, recom-
mendations from pilot regions and states on
possible changes to the oversight process, and
ideas for new indicators or revisions to existing
indicators.
Based on the assessment, EPA also will consider
which logic model indicators should be included
in the next EPA Strategic Plan (2009-2014).
Timeframe
FY2007
-------
Appendix B: Proposed Future Program Evaluations
GOAL 2 (continued)
Evaluation
Topic
Assessment of
Public Water
Supply Logic Model
(Continued)
Strategic Goal
and Objective
Goal 2, Objective 1
Proposed General Scope Timeframe
and Issues To Be Addressed
Information will be collected through interviews FY 2007
and facilitated discussion with EPA regional
offices and state managers and staff.
Measuring
Effectiveness of the
Beaches
Environmental
Assessment and
Coastal Health
(BEACH) Act
Grants
Goal 2, Objective 2
EPAs Office of Water administers the BEACH
Act by making available almost $10 million in
grants each year to 35 eligible coastal states/
territories to protect public heath at the nation's
beaches. States/territories use these grants to
monitor water quality at their beaches and to
notify the public when water quality problems
exist. The ultimate goal is to protect millions of
Americans from exposure to unhealthy levels of
pathogens at coastal beaches by giving them the
information to make informed choices on where
to swim.
The evaluation will assess the effectiveness of
state and territory BEACH monitoring/notifica'
tion programs by reviewing relevant beach
monitoring and notification data and studies
completed by the local beach authorities. EPA
will also visit nine state officials who administer
monitoring and public notification data to obtain
their perspectives on the utility of monitoring
and the effectiveness of their programs.
FY2008
Review of State
On-Site/
Decentralized
Programs
Goal 2, Objective '.
This review will look at the elements of state on-
site/decentralized programs to evaluate whether
they are adequate to protect public health and
the environment. The elements to be reviewed
include planning, performance, site evaluation,
design, construction, operations and mainte'
nance, compliance inspections and monitoring,
residuals management, record keeping, inventory
and reporting, public education, and
funding/financial assistance.
Data will be collected through document reviews
and meetings with regional and state staff.
FY2008
Program Evaluation
of Tribal 106 Grant
Guidance
Goal 2, Objective '.
With the FY 2007 grant cycle, EPAs Office of
Water is beginning to use the new Tribal 106
Grant Guidance to lead tribes in a more struc-
tured direction for managing their water quality
protection programs. The new guidance guides
tribes through various alternatives for designing
their water quality programs and tiers of improve-
ment. The guidance also lays the foundation for a
new era of monitoring and collecting data on
tribal waters.
FY2008
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
GOAL 2 (continued)
Evaluation
Program Evaluation
of Tribal 106 Grant
Guidance
(Continued)
Strategic Goal Proposed General Scope and Issues To Timeframe
and Objective Be Addressed
Goal 2, Objective 2
The evaluation will focus on a core subset of
tribes (most likely those tribes committed to
meeting Program Activity Measure WQ-9 and
implementing monitoring strategies in FY 2007)
to assess the effectiveness of the guidance in
meeting new tribal water quality requirements,
such as development of tribal monitoring strate-
gies, data collection, and submission to EPA. It
will include a narrative assessment of tribal water
quality, and will monitor EPA's ability to define,
as per the guidance, a baseline for tracking and
assessing the quality of waters in Indian country.1
FY2008
Evaluation of the
Clean Water Act
Section 319 Non-
Point Source
Program
Goal 2, Objective 2
The Clean Water Act establishes a "national pol-
icy" to develop and implement non-point source
(NPS) programs expeditiously to achieve the
goals of the Act. The Section 319 program
addresses NPS pollution, which is the largest
remaining cause of water quality impairments.
Section 319 is the only program to address all
sources of NPS pollution. Section 319 can be
used for monitoring and watershed planning, for
which U.S. Department of Agriculture funds can-
not be used.
Evaluation methodology will include analysis of
project documents and monitoring results, site vis-
its, and discussion sessions and interviews with state
managers and staff and regional project officers.
FY2008
Measuring the
Success of Water
Quality Trading to
Meet NPDES
Permit Limits
Goal 2, Objective 2
One of EPA's key priorities is to foster innovative,
market-based solutions to environmental prob-
lems. Trading pollutant credits among point and
non-point sources is a flexible way to meet
NPDES permit limits and obtain substantial cost
savings. This evaluation will identify lessons
learned from successful voluntary water quality
trading programs; potential barriers to trading;
and opportunities for improving Agency policies,
guidance, and outreach/education efforts to foster
water quality trading. The evaluation will collect
information through interviews with federal
employees, state NPDES permit writers, and local
champions/developers of water quality trading
programs.
FY2007
Program Evaluation
of the Targeted
Watersheds Grants
(TWO)
Goal 2, Objective 2
The TWG focus on identifying watersheds for
which community-based collaborative partner-
ships are ready to implement watershed plans
that, when funded, will lead to accelerated and
measurable environmental results.
FY2007
-------
Appendix B: Proposed Future Program Evaluations
GOAL 2 (continued)
Evaluation
Topic
Program Evaluation
of the Targeted
Watersheds Grants
(TWG)
(Continued)
Strategic Goal
and Objective
Goal 2, Objective 2
Proposed General Scope and Issues To
Be Addressed
EPA plans to evaluate the extent to which envi-
ronmental results are being achieved as a result of
TWG Implementation grants. The evaluation
will also assess factors that contribute to imple-
menting projects successfully and achieving
quantifiable environmental results, including
expanding grant recipients' technical and organi-
zational capacity. Evaluation methodology will
include analysis of project documents and moni-
toring results, site visits, and discussions and
interviews with selected grantees and their regional
project officers
Timeframe
FY2007
GOAL 3
Evaluation Strategic Goal Proposed General Scope and Issues To Timeframe
Topic and Objective Be Addressed
Measuring the
Effectiveness of the
CORE Emergency
Response (ER)
Program Review
Process
Superfund Program
Reviews
Goal 3, Objective 2
Goal 3, Objective 2
EPA's Office of Emergency Management (OEM)
CORE ER review process appears to have
improved response preparedness in all the regions.
The program has reached certain goals, expressed
as CORE ER scores, that are taken to be a meas-
ure of each region's preparedness. OEM will test
whether reaching those goals makes a difference
in the real response world. In addition, OEM
needs to improve the CORE ER instrument
(checklist) to address lessons learned from recent
responses. This project will evaluate whether per-
ceived improvement in preparedness is providing
more efficient and effective response to real inci-
dents. CORE ER involves all 10 EPA regions.
The Superfund program review is a 24-month
process where each region will undergo a review
on selected program elements. The review ele-
ments are selected based on their relative
importance in meeting program targets such as
construction completions, human exposures
under control, contaminated groundwater under
control, and deletions. This process involves con-
ducting in-depth regional interviews and
discussion sessions on the selected program ele-
ments, using carefully designed governing
questions.
FY2007
Complete first
Superfund pro-
gram review
cycle in second
quarter of
FY 2008.
Initiate second
Superfund pro-
gram review
cycle in third
quarter
FY 2008 and
complete this
cycle in
FY 2010.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
GOAL 3 (continued)
Evaluation Strategic Goal Proposed General Scope and Issues To
Topic and Objective Be Addressed
Timeframe
Joint Project with
EPA's Conflict
Prevention and
Resolution Center
on Impacts and
Effectiveness of the
Collaborative
Decision- Making
Process at
Superfund Sites
Superfund
Workload
Assessment Project
Re-evaluation of
Site-Specific
Payroll Charging
Broaden Core
Emergency
Response (ER)
Program and
Evaluate Annually
Goal 3, Objective 2
Goal 3, Objective 2
Goal 3, Objective 2
Goal 3, Objective 2
This project will assess the effects of the collabo-
rative process compared with an alternative, such
as litigation. It will evaluate whether or not the
collaborative process leads to a Record of
Decision stage at Superfund sites and provides a
better environmental result than the alternative
process. Evaluation results will inform the collab-
orative decision-making process.
This project will develop a sound analytical basis
for ensuring that human resources are used effec-
tively and efficiently to achieve program goals. A
Working Group, composed of representatives of
all major EPA Superfund stakeholders, will use a
bottom-up approach to determine work years
required to implement and support the program.
This evaluation will focus on whether improve-
ment has occurred based on the site-specific
payroll benchmarking effort completed in second
quarter of FY 2006.
We will extend the Core ER program to include
all aspects of emergency management activities
(i.e., emergency response, emergency prepared-
ness, and accident prevention.) We will use the
baseline already developed under Core ER, to
adapt and broaden the Core ER process, and then
annually evaluate all aspects of the emergency
management program.
Estimated
completion
date FY 2007
Estimated
completion
date FY 2008
This is a
follow-up
project to
work com-
pleted in
second quar-
ter FY 2006.
Implement
changes and
begin evalua-
tions during
FY 2007.
GOAL 4
Evaluation
Topic
Evaluation of the
National Estuary
Program
Strategic Goal Proposed General Scope and Issues To Timeframe
and Objective Be Addressed
Goal 4, Objective 3
The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the
progress the 28 estuaries have made in meeting
their goals since the inception of the National
Estuary Program in 1987. Effort will be made to
characterize and assess best practices that can be
transferred to other geographic-based programs.
2007-2008
-------
Appendix B: Proposed Future Program Evaluations
GOAL 4 (continued)
Evaluation
Topic
Program Evaluation
of EPA's Wetlands
Program
Development
Grants
Strategic Goal Proposed General Scope and Issues To
and Objective Be Addressed
Goal 4, Objective 3
EPA is authorized to manage a Wetland Program
Development Grant program to empower partners
in developing comprehensive state and tribal wet-
lands programs. EPA's Wetlands Division would
like to evaluate the effectiveness of the grants in
achieving program outcomes.
EPA will use a retrospective data mine of its data-
bases supplemented by information from sources
such as interviews with regional staff and data
from organizations such as the Association of
State Wetland Managers and the Environmental
Law Institute. Statistical analysis will answer some
questions, while others will be best answered with
descriptive narratives.
Timeframe
Scoping and
refinement of
questions to
be answered
during the
evaluation
and method-
ology to be
conducted in
2007.
Evaluation to
be conducted
in 2008.
GOAL 5
Evaluation Strategic Goal Proposed General Scope and Issues To Timeframe
Topic and Objective Be Addressed
Evaluating EPA's
Petroleum Refinery
National Priority
Performance - Based
Strategy
Implementation
Goal 5, Objective 1
As part of EPA's strategic planning process, our
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA) develops a national program
priority component that focuses attention on spe-
cific environmental problems and patterns of
non-compliance. This evaluation will help identi-
fy components of a successful priority work
process for addressing significant national envi-
ronmental problems. OECA is currently midway
in implementing 9 priority strategies under its
FY 2005-2007 work planning cycle, and seeks to
leam more about the specific aspects of the petro-
leum refinery process that worked well, and can
be applied to other industry sectors and media
programs and replicated at the regional and state
levels. Knowledge gained from an effective exit
strategy for the Petroleum Refinery process will
help to inform the process for the nine current
priorities and future efforts. Evaluation methodol-
ogy includes interviews with EPA staff, partners,
and stakeholders. In addition, the evaluation will
require a review of strategy documents and sup-
porting data.
FY2007
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
GOAL 5 (continued)
Evaluation Strategic Goal Proposed General Scope and Issues To Timeframe
Topic and Objective Be Addressed
Evaluation of the
full implementa-
tion of the State
Review
Framework
Goal 5, Objective 1
This evaluation will address the effectiveness of
implementing the State Review Framework (SRF)
in all 50 states and 5 territories. The SRF is a tool
to assess performance in core enforcement and
compliance assurance for state air, water, and haz-
ardous waste programs. The SRF was piloted in 10
states in FY 2006. By the end of FY 2007, the
remaining states and territories will be reviewed.
The evaluation methodology will include surveys
of state environmental agencies that were
reviewed under the SRF and surveys of state
media association members.
The evalua-
tion will be
conducted in
FY 2008 when
the implemen'
tation phase is
complete.
EPA New England
Marina Initiative
Goal 5, Objective 2
Under the EPA New England marina initiative,
which ran from 2001 to 2005, a variety of marina
environmental assistance projects were imple-
mented and the results were measured. The
primary goal of this effort was to help marinas
meet required and desired practices managing
stormwater, oil and fuel, and hazardous waste.
Under the measurement component, environmen-
tal indicators were established and measured using
statistically valid methods, including on-site
assessment visits to monitor progress. The evalua-
tion will determine the extent to which the
program achieved its intended objectives.
Evaluation methodology includes a review of the
results of 140 on-site marina visits, as well as a review
of regulatory records.
FY2007
Evaluation of the
National
Environmental
Performance Track
(NEPT) program
Goal 5, Objective 2
This third party evaluation will review the effec-
tiveness of the NEPT program in meeting its
stated goals. The project will evaluate whether
the program is likely to achieve the intended
results, and will make appropriate recommenda-
tions on program design and implementation.
FY 2008:
Initiate evalua-
tion.
FY 2009:
Complete eval-
uation and
develop recom-
mendations to
implement
findings.
NOTES
Use of the terms "Indian country," "Indian lands," "tribal lands," "tribal waters," and "tribal areas" within this
Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is
their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs.
-------
APPENDIX C:
Summary of
Consultation Efforts
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
APPENDIX C—SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION EFFORTS
Consultation with EPA's federal, state,
local, and tribal government partners and
with our many stakeholders has been an inte-
gral part of the Agency's strategic planning
process. The views, comments, and concerns
of our partners and stakeholders form the
basis for developing our 5-year Strategic Plan,
and their ongoing participation is vital to
achieving the goals and objectives we have
set forth.
EPA's national and regional managers
organized meetings, participated in confer-
ences, and presented briefings to ensure that
our partners and stakeholders fully under-
stood our process for developing this Strategic
Plan and had the opportunity to participate.
We distributed our proposed strategic archi-
tecture-goals, objectives, sub-objectives, and
associated strategic targets-and subsequently
the full-text draft of the Strategic Plan to hun-
dreds of our partners and stakeholders. We
posted working papers, the draft Strategic Plan
architecture, and the full-text draft of the
Plan on EPA's internet website, and we
offered several options for individuals and
groups to provide their comments. We care-
fully considered all the comments we
received at each stage of the development
process.
This appendix summarizes major activi-
ties we conducted to consult with parties
interested in or likely to be affected by EPA's
Strategic Plan. It briefly describes our consul-
tation with the Congress and our state and
tribal partners. It also includes a list of all
organizations (for example, state, tribal, and
industry associations) as well as federal agen-
cies from which we solicited or received
comments.
EARLY CONSULTATION ON STATE AND
TRIBAL ISSUES AND PRIORITIES
Since states and tribes are major partners
with EPA in environmental protection, we
were very interested in their views and con-
cerns. In August 2005, EPA regional offices
consulted with states and tribes about the
issues and priorities they felt were important
for EPA to consider as we revised our
Strategic Plan. Regional offices prepared brief
summaries of the concerns highlighted; these
were posted on EPA's internet site for public
view and provided to our strategic goal teams
for consideration. We also posted goal team
responses describing how the state and tribal
issues and priorities raised were considered in
revising the Plan.
RELEASE OF DRAFT ARCHITECTURE AND
FULL-TEXT DRAFT
EPA considered all comments received
from our state and tribal partners on our draft
strategic architecture, which we sent to more
than 800 organizations for review and com-
ment in mid-February 2006. We solicited
comments on the draft architecture from
Members of Congress; states and state organi-
zations; all federally recognized tribes; tribal
organizations; local government representa-
tives; other federal agencies; members of
environmental, academic, and public policy
groups; and representatives of the regulated
community through March 2006.
We took into account all the comments
we received on the draft architecture as we
developed a full-text draft of the Strategic
Plan. We provided this full-text draft to the
more than 800 recipients noted above and
solicited their comments through mid-July
2006.
Reviewers were offered multiple alterna-
tives for submitting comments on the
architecture and full text draft—electronical-
ly, via EPA's internet website; by mail; and by
telephone. We designed a database to capture
comments, which were immediately forward-
ed to appropriate staff and managers for
consideration.
-------
Appendix C: Summary of Consultation Efforts
CONSULTING WITH STATE PARTNERS
In addition to the early outreach to states
and tribes described above, EPA goal teams
worked with media-specific state associations
to develop the strategic architecture and
means and strategies for achieving our goals
and objectives. EPA also collaborated with
the Environmental Council of the States
(EGOS), the national association of state and
territorial environmental commissioners, par-
ticipating in several national meetings
sponsored by EGOS and ensuring that EGOS
members were well informed about the
Strategic Plan revision process and the oppor-
tunities for engagement. EGOS assisted us
during the development of this Strategic Plan
by providing information and materials for
review to individual state agencies and by
coordinating responses from EGOS members
on the full-text draft. In addition, Agency
goal teams were encouraged to work with the
appropriate EGOS media committees
throughout the revision process.
CONSULTING WITH TRIBAL PARTNERS
In June 2005, EPA staff participated in
the National Tribal Conference on
Environmental Management to discuss the
revision of EPA's Strategic Plan. This meeting
brought together tribal leaders and senior
tribal environmental managers from across
the country and provided a forum for solicit-
ing tribal perspectives on the most important
environmental challenges in the years ahead.
We continued to consult with tribes at
the national and regional levels throughout
the development of the Strategic Plan. EPA
representatives met with the National Tribal
Caucus in March 2006 to discuss their com-
ments on the draft strategic planning
architecture. Our strategic goal teams were
encouraged to work with tribal liaisons iden-
tified by the Tribal Caucus and with tribal
media associations. EPA representatives also
participated regularly in Tribal Caucus meet-
ings to keep members aware of progress and
opportunities for engagement.
CONSULTING WITH THE CONGRESS
In February 2006, we provided the
Chairmen and Ranking Minority Members of
EPA's authorizing and appropriations com-
mittees, their staffs, and other interested
Members with copies of our draft strategic
architecture. We provided the full-text draft
of EPA's Strategic Plan to Members and
Congressional staff in early June.
Congressional contacts were encouraged to
submit comments on these documents elec-
tronically, via the database link to EPA's
internet site, by telephone, or by mail.
On April 11, 2006, EPA met (hosted by
staff of the Senate Environment and Public
Works Committee) with interested Senate
staff to discuss the requirements of the
Government Performance and Results Act,
EPA's strategic planning process, our draft
strategic architecture, and plans for next
steps in developing the full-text draft of the
Strategic Plan. This consultation session was
followed by a briefing on May 10, 2006 for
additional staff members of the Senate
Environment and Public Works Committee.
A briefing on the full-text draft for staff of
the Committee was held on June 23, 2006.
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
LIST OF ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED
In preparing our 2006-2011 Strategic Plan, EPA consulted with several hundred organiza-
tions and individuals. In addition to the groups mentioned above, we solicited or received
input on our draft documents from the following organizations.
Organizations
Alameda County, California, Waste
Management Authority
Alaska Intertribal Council
Alternatives for Community and
Environment
American Association for the Advancement
of Science
American Chemical Society Task Force on
Environmental Health and Safety
American Chemistry Council
American Farmland Trust
American Forest and Paper Association
American Forests
American Indian Science and Engineering
Society
American Industrial Health Council
American Lung Association
American Petroleum Institute
American Public Health Association
American Rivers
American Society of Civil Engineers
American Water Works Association
ARI Technologies
Arizona Department of Environmental
Quality
Aroostook Band of Micmacs
Association of American Pesticide Control
Officials
Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies
Association of State Drinking Water
Administrators
Association of State and Interstate Water
Pollution Control Administrators
Association of State and Territorial Health
Officials
Association of State and Territorial Solid
Waste Management Officials
Association of State Drinking Water
Administrators
Association of State Wetland Managers
Bowdoin College
Business Roundtable
California Department of Health and Human
Services
California Indian Basketweavers Association
Center for Biological Diversity
Center for International Environmental Law
Center for Regulatory Effectiveness
Central States Air Resources Agencies
Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe
Children's Defense Fund
Chippewa Ottawa Resource Authority
Clean Water Action
Clean Water Network
Coalition for Effective Environmental
Information
Coalition for Environmentally Responsible
Economics
Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission
Concurrent Technologies Corporation
Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians
Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian
Reservation
Conservation Fund
Construction Materials Recycling
Association
Corporate Environmental Enforcement
Council
Council of Energy Resource Tribes
Council for Excellence in Government
Council of State Governments
CropLife America
Defenders of Wildlife
Duke University
Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund
Eco-Cycle
Ecological Society of America
Electric Power Research Institute
Environmental Council of the States
Environmental Defense
Environmental Health Coalition
Environmental Law Institute
-------
Appendix C: Summary of Consultation Efforts
Environmental Working Group
Friends of the Earth
Fund for Animals
Georgia Environmental Protection Division
Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife
Commission
Greengoat
Greenpeace
Haudenosaunee Environmental Task Force
Hualapai Nation
Humane Society of the United States
Idaho Department of Environmental Quality
Indigenous Environmental Network
Indigenous Waters Initiative
Institute for Tribal Environmental
Professionals
Intertribal Advisory Committee of the Nez
Perce Tribe
Intertribal Agriculture Council
Intertribal Bison Cooperative
Intertribal Council of Arizona
Intertribal Council of Michigan
Intertribal Environmental Council of
Oklahoma
Intertribal Timber Council
International City/County Management
Association
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Kansas Department of Health and
Environment
Lac Vieux Desert Band of Lake Superior
Chippewa Indians
Local Government Advisory Committee
Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality
Maine Board of Pesticide Control
Mercatus Center
Midwest Alliance of Sovereign Tribes
Midwest Tribal Aquaculture Network
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Missouri Department of Agriculture, Bureau
of Pesticide Control
Missouri Department of Natural Resources
Mni Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coalition
Montana Department of Environmental
Quality
Montana Department of Natural Resources
Morgan, Lewis and Bockius
National Academy of Public Administration
National Advisory Council for
Environmental Policy and Technology
National Association of Attorneys General
National Association of Home Builders
National Association of Manufacturers
National Association of Schools of Public
Affairs and Administration
National Association of State Departments
of Agriculture
National Association of State Universities
and Land Grant Colleges
National Audubon Society
National Congress of American Indians
National Council for Science and the
Environment
National Environmental Trust
National Federation of Independent Business
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
National Fisheries Institute
National Indian Health Board
National Mining Association
National Parks Conservation Association
National Pesticide Management Association
National Pollution Prevention Roundtable
National Research Council
National Tribal Air Association
National Tribal Caucus
National Tribal Environmental Council
National Wildlife Federation
Native American Fish and Wildlife Society
Native American Rights Fund
Native American Water Association
Native Ecology Initiative, Incorporated
Natural Resources Defense Council
Navajo Nation
Nevada Division of Environmental
Protection
New England Interstate Water Pollution
Control Commission
New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection
New Mexico Environmental Department,
Surface Water Quality Bureau
New York State Department of Health
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
Northwest Indian Applied Research Institute
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission
Ocean Conservancy
Oglala Sioux Tribe
Oklahoma Office of the Environment
Oklahoma Water Resources Board
OMB Watch
Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
Pesticide Policy Coalition
PPG Industries, Incorporated
Prescott Land and Livestock
Princeton University
RAND Public Policy Research
React For Environmental Justice
Resources for the Future
River Network
Rocky Mountain Institute
San Francisco Department of the
Environment
Solid Waste Association of North America
Southern Organizing Committee for
Economic and Social Justice
State and Territorial Air Pollution Program
Administrators and Association of Local
Air Pollution Control Officials
Tribal Science Council
Tribal Solid Waste Advisory Network
U.S. Chamber of Commerce Environment,
Energy and Technology Affairs
U.S. Composting Council
U.S. Public Interest Research Group
Union of Concerned Scientists
United South and Eastern Tribes,
Incorporated
University of Minnesota, Department of Soil,
Waste, and Climate
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Vermont Department of Environmental
Conservation
Vermont Water Supply Division
Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality
Washington State Department of Health
Waste Management, Incorporated
West County Toxics Coalition (California)
West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection
Western Governors Association
Western Regional Air Partnership
Wilderness Society
Wildlife Habitat Enhancement Council
World Resources Institute
Yukon River Intertribal Watershed Council
Federal Agencies
Army Corps of Engineers
Consumer Product Safety Commission
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
Department of Defense
Department of Education
Department of Energy
Department of Health and Human Services
Department of Housing and Urban
Development
Department of the Interior
Department of Justice
Department of Labor
Department of State
Department of Transportation
Department of Treasury
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
General Services Administration
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
National Science Foundation
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Office of Management and Budget
Small Business Administration
Tennessee Valley Authority
U.S. Agency for International Development
U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Trade Representative
-------
APPENDIX D:
Areas of Coordination Between
EPA and Other Federal Agencies
-------
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan—Charting Our Course
APPENDIX D—AREAS OF COORDINATION BETWEEN EPA
AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES
Areas of continued cooperation or coordination with other federal agencies for each of
EPA's five strategic goals (indicated by an "X"):
DEPARTMENT / AGENCY
Agriculture
Army Corps of Engineers
Commerce
Consumer Product Safety Commission
Defense
Education
Energy
Federal Emergency Management Agency
General Services Administration
Health and Human Services
Homeland Security
Housing and Urban Development
Interior
Justice
Labor
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration
National Science Foundation
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Small Business Administration
State
Transportation
Treasury
Tennessee Valley Authority
U.S. Agency for International Development
U.S. Trade Representative
GOAL
Goal 1:
Clean Air
and Global
Climate
Change
Goal 2:
Clean and
Safe Water
Goal 3:
Land
Preserva-
tion and
Restoration
Goal 4:
Healthy
Communi'
ties and
Ecosystems
Goal 5:
Compli'
ance and
Environ-
mental
Stewardship
-------
Clean Air and Global Climate Change
Protect and improve the air so it is healthy to breathe and risks to human health and the environment are
reduced. Reduce greenhouse gas intensity by enhancing partnerships with businesses and other sectors.
Clean and Safe Water
Ensure drinking water is safe. Restore and maintain oceans, watersheds, and their
aquatic ecosystems to protect human health, support economic and recreational activities,
and provide healthy habitat for fish, plants, and wildlife.
Land Preservation and Restoration
dices and cleaning up
ful substances.
contaminated properties to reduce risks posec
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
Protect, sustain, or restore the health of people, communities, and ecosystems using
integrated and comprehensive approaches and partnerships.
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
Protect human health and the environment through ensuring compliance with environmental
requirements by enforcing environmental statutes, preventing pollution, and promoting
environmental stewardship. Encourage innovation and provide incentives for governments, businesses,
and the public that promote environmental stewardship,and long-term sustainable outcomes.
-------
------- |